Advertisement

Virtual Surgical Planning (VSP)

  • David SylvesterEmail author
  • Steven M. Sullivan
Chapter

Abstract

Orthognathic surgery has seen many developments and advances throughout its evolutionary history. Recent trends have seen a shift away from traditional model surgery and have sought to embrace more contemporary methods of virtual surgical planning (VSP) [1]. Since its inception, orthognathic surgery has successfully and predictably been planned and performed by means of traditional, analytical model surgery. Introduction of the cone-beam CT in 1998 in Europe and then in the USA in 2001 provoked the beginnings of a paradigm shift [2, 3]. The literature has since been replete with studies focused on providing evidence that virtual surgical planning is as effective and predictable as traditional model surgery [4–6].

Keywords

Virtual surgical planning VSP Orthognathic surgery Temporomandibular joint replacement TMJ Concepts® MedCad® SureSmile® 

Notes

Acknowledgement

Special thanks: The authors would like to thank Dr. J. Peter Kierl for the orthodontic component of this case and photographs used in this chapter.

References

  1. 1.
    Hammoudeh JA, Howell LK, Boutros S, Scott MA, Urata MM. Current status of surgical planning for orthognathic surgery: traditional methods versus 3D surgical planning. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3(2):e307. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000184.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998;8(9):1558–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc 1939. 2012;143(8):899–902.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bengtsson M, Wall G, Miranda-Burgos P, Rasmusson L. Treatment outcome in orthognathic surgery – a prospective comparison of accuracy in computer assisted two and three-dimensional prediction techniques. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.01.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gelesko S, Markiewicz MR, Weimer K, Bell RB. Computer-aided orthognathic surgery. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;20(1):107–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cxom.2012.01.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yuan P, Mai H, Li J, et al. Design, development and clinical validation of computer-aided surgical simulation system for streamlined orthognathic surgical planning. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1585-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xia JJ, Gateno J, Teichgraeber JF. New clinical protocol to evaluate craniomaxillofacial deformity and plan surgical correction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(10):2093–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.04.057.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levine JP, Patel A, Saadeh PB, Hirsch DL. Computer-aided design and manufacturing in craniomaxillofacial surgery: the new state of the art. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(1):288–93. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e318241ba92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Swennen GRJ, Mollemans W, Schutyser F. Three-dimensional treatment planning of orthognathic surgery in the era of virtual imaging. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(10):2080–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.06.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bobek S, Farrell B, Choi C, Farrell B, Weimer K, Tucker M. Virtual surgical planning for orthognathic surgery using digital data transfer and an intraoral fiducial marker: the charlotte method. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(6):1143–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2014.12.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Swennen GRJ. Timing of three-dimensional virtual treatment planning of orthognathic surgery: a prospective single-surgeon evaluation on 350 consecutive cases. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin N Am. 2014;26(4):475–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2014.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Resnick CM, Inverso G, Wrzosek M, Padwa BL, Kaban LB, Peacock ZS. Is there a difference in cost between standard and virtual surgical planning for orthognathic surgery? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(9):1827–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.03.035.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu XJ, Li QQ, Zhang Z, Li TT, Xie Z, Zhang Y. Virtual occlusal definition for orthognathic surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45(3):406–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.07.022.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nilsson J, Richards RG, Thor A, Kamer L. Virtual bite registration using intraoral digital scanning, CT and CBCT: In vitro evaluation of a new method and its implication for orthognathic surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(9):1194–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2016.06.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgical SciencesUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma CityUSA

Personalised recommendations