Intraoperative Bildgebung in der Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie

Hanken, Henning; Lohse, C.; Assaf, Alexandre T; Heiland, Max

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1350665

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This allows the reconstruction of orbital walls to be avoided and necessary corrections, for example, of incorrect implant positions, to be performed during the same surgical intervention. 1,2,4 The following imaging modalities are fundamentally available today for intraoperative use 2 :…”

Section: Outcome Validation and Quality Control With Intraoperative 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although intraoperative ultrasonography shows the zygomatic arch and the anterior maxillary wall, it does not allow adequate assessments to be made of the orbita's complex bony anatomy. 2,5,6 Magnetic Resonance Imaging A disadvantage of using MRI for orbital reconstruction is the limited possibility of assessing bony structures and inserted implants. The long scan time and its complex intraoperative handling, particularly in a nonmetallic environment and in view of the need for a radiologist to be present, are disadvantages of the intraoperative use of MRI in orbital reconstruction surgery.…”

Section: Ultrasonographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Its disadvantages are the relatively high doses of radiation emitted, the high procurement costs and, as with magnetic resonance tomography, the imperative need for the presence of a radiologist with basic knowledge in orbital surgery, surgical demands, and sterility. 2 This final disadvantage may result in intraoperative delays as well. Therefore, the authors do not at present wholly recommend the use of CT for intraoperative imaging in orbital reconstruction.…”

Section: Computed Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although no comparative studies have been conducted, the applied radiation dose per C-arm rotation can be assumed to be less than for a comparable conventional CT of the facial skeleton. 2 This assumption is derived from the fact that the technology applied is what is called CBCT. This technology is, in turn, known for emitting a radiation dose in comparable facial skeleton scans that is below that of CT. [14][15][16][17] Both mobile and fixed systems are available for installing 3D C-arms.…”

Section: Cone Beam Computed Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 This, in turn, places extremely high demands on the imaging procedures used for purposes of diagnosis, therapy planning, and intraoperative and postoperative quality control. 2 Nowadays, talking about modern orbital reconstruction means inevitably talking about the entire workflow of computer-assisted surgery for reconstructions of the facial skeleton. This workflow can be further subdivided as shown in ►Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital and Midface Reconstruction

Wilde

Schramm

2014

Facial plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The orbit is very often affected by injuries which can leave patients not only with esthetic deficits, but also with functional impairments if reconstruction is inadequate. Computer-assisted surgery helps to achieve predictable outcomes in reconstruction. Today, intraoperative three-dimensional (3D) imaging is an important element in the workflow of computer-assisted orbital surgery. Clinical and radiological diagnosis by means of computed tomography is followed by preoperative computer-assisted planning to define and simulate the desired outcome of reconstruction. In difficult cases, intraoperative navigation helps in the implementation of procedure plans at the site of surgery. Intraoperative 3D imaging then allows an intraoperative final control to be made and the outcome of the surgery to be validated. Today, this is preferably done using 3D C-arm devices based on cone beam computed tomography. They help to avoid malpositioning of bone fragments and/or inserted implants assuring the quality of complex operations and reducing the number of secondary interventions necessary.

show abstract

Section: Outcome Validation and Quality Control With Intraoperative 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ultrasonographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Computed Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cone Beam Computed Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital and Midface Reconstruction

Wilde

Schramm

2014

Facial plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Traumatologie des Mittelgesichts

Kühnel

Reichert

2015

Laryngo-Rhino-Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fractures of the midface pose a serious medical problem as for their complexity, frequency and their socio-economic impact. Interdisciplinary approaches and up-to-date diagnostic and surgical techniques provide favorable results in the majority of cases though. Traffic accidents are the leading cause and male adults in their thirties are affected most often. Treatment algorithms for nasal bone fractures, maxillary and zygoma fractures are widely agreed upon whereas trauma to the frontal sinus and the orbital apex are matter of current debate. Advances in endoscopic surgery and limitations of evidence based gain of knowledge are matters that are focused on in the corresponding chapter. As for the fractures of the frontal sinus a strong tendency towards minimized approaches can be seen. Obliteration and cranialisation seem to decrease in numbers.Some critical remarks in terms of high dose methylprednisolone therapy for traumatic optic nerve injury seem to be appropriate.Intraoperative cone beam radiographs and preshaped titanium mesh implants for orbital reconstruction are new techniques and essential aspects in midface traumatology. Fractures of the anterior skull base with cerebrospinal fluid leaks show very promising results in endonasal endoscopic repair.

show abstract

Comparison of the Effective Radiation Dose in the Region of the Facial Skull Between Multidetector CT, Dental Conebeam CT and Intraoperative 3D C-Arms

Pietzka,

Grieser,

Winter

et al. 2023

Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design Experimental single-centre study of X-ray absorption using a phantom skull. Objective This experimental study aimed to compare the radiation doses of different 3D imaging devices used in maxillofacial surgery, including one Multidetector CT (MDCT), two Conebeam CT (CBCT) and four intraoperative 3D C-arms. Methods Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were used to determine the absorbed radiation in an Alderson-Rando phantom skull. The phantom skull was positioned in the before mentioned seven devices and a defined 3D facial skull image was acquired. Subsequently, the TLD’S were read out and the effective doses (ED) and the organ doses (OD) were calculated and compared. Results OD varied significantly between tissues as well as between the 3D X-ray devices. The OD of the 3D C-arms were significantly lower than those of all other devices. The OD of the CT, especially in the standard setting, was the highest. Only by special adjustments of the scan protocol regarding CMF requirements for traumatology, the MDCT could achieve almost equivalent doses as the two tested CBCT-scanners. The calculated effective doses were also lowest for the 3D C-arm devices (11.2 to 129.9 μSv). The ED of the MDCT were significant higher (284.52–844.97 μSv) than in all other devices. The ED of the CBCTs (173.7–184.9) were lower than for MDCT but still higher than those of the 3D C-arms. Conclusions Intraoperative imaging using 3D C-arm devices is an effective method to verify reduction results in maxillofacial surgery intraoperatively with significantly lower ED than postoperatively CBCT and MDCT imaging.

show abstract

Intraoperative Bildgebung in der Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital and Midface Reconstruction

Intraoperative Imaging in Orbital and Midface Reconstruction

Traumatologie des Mittelgesichts

Comparison of the Effective Radiation Dose in the Region of the Facial Skull Between Multidetector CT, Dental Conebeam CT and Intraoperative 3D C-Arms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About