Chepurnyi Yurii, Zhukovtseva Olena, Kopchak Andriy, Kanura Oleksandr
Department of maxillo-facial surgery and innovative dentistry, Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenka Blvd, 13, 01601, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Department of maxillo-facial surgery and innovative dentistry, Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenka Blvd, 13, 01601, Kyiv, Ukraine.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2022 Sep;50(9):686-691. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2022.05.006. Epub 2022 Jun 3.
The aim of the study was to compare automated and manually conducted (slice-by-slice) virtual orbital wall reconstruction in terms of PSI design, manufacture, and clinical application for orbital fracture management. Patients with orbital wall fractures were evaluated for the potential for treatment with PSI, based on automated virtual wall reconstruction; these formed the main group. The surgical outcomes of these main-group patients' treatments were compared with those of the control group, which comprised patients randomly selected for this study, each of whom had the same orbital trauma patterns and were also managed with PSI. However, the control group patients were treated using 'slice-by-slice' virtual orbital reconstruction. Mean volume differences between the intact and reconstructed orbit were 0.65 ± 0.26 cm in the main group (n = 23) and 0.57 ± 0.23 cm in the control (n = 27; p = 0.837). In both groups, no cases of implant malposition or enophthalmos were detected after surgery. Orbital shape difference was similar for the main group and the control, at -3.3 ± 3.5% and 3.25 ± 2.5%, respectively (p = 0.929). Diplopia was diagnosed at the 3-month follow-up in 13.0% of the main group and in 11.1% of the control (p = 0.651). The average times spent on computer-aided design (CAD) procedures, including segmentation, virtual orbital reconstruction, and PSI design, were 36.7 ± 6.9 min in the main group and 72.9 ± 7.7 min in the control group (p < 0.001). Within the limitations of the study it seems that PSI based on automated virtual reconstruction is a relevant alternative treatment option for orbital fractures because of its clinical efficacy that is similar to PSI based on a 'slice-by-slice' CAD protocol.
本研究的目的是比较自动和手动(逐层)进行的虚拟眶壁重建在用于眼眶骨折治疗的个性化手术器械(PSI)设计、制造及临床应用方面的差异。基于自动虚拟壁重建,对眼眶壁骨折患者进行PSI治疗潜力评估;这些患者构成主要组。将这些主要组患者的治疗手术结果与对照组进行比较,对照组由随机选入本研究的患者组成,他们每个人都有相同的眼眶创伤模式,并且也采用PSI进行治疗。然而,对照组患者采用“逐层”虚拟眼眶重建进行治疗。主要组(n = 23)完整眼眶与重建眼眶之间的平均体积差异为0.65±0.26 cm,对照组(n = 27;p = 0.837)为0.57±0.23 cm。两组术后均未检测到植入物位置不当或眼球内陷病例。主要组和对照组的眼眶形状差异相似,分别为-3.3±3.5%和3.25±2.5%(p = 0.929)。在3个月随访时,主要组13.0%的患者和对照组11.1%的患者被诊断为复视(p = 0.651)。主要组和对照组在计算机辅助设计(CAD)程序上花费的平均时间,包括分割、虚拟眼眶重建和PSI设计,分别为36.7±6.9分钟和72.9±7.7分钟(p < 0.001)。在本研究的局限性范围内,基于自动虚拟重建的PSI似乎是眼眶骨折的一种相关替代治疗选择,因为其临床疗效与基于“逐层”CAD方案的PSI相似。