Würsching T, Kesztyűs A, Pottel L, Swennen G, Nagy K
Department of Oro-Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary; Centre for Facial Reconstruction, Pediatric Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
School of PHD Studies, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2025 Jun 3. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2025.05.006.
Alveolar bone grafting is an essential step in the treatment of cleft lip and palate. A method for designing a surgical template for the ideal graft volume and shape has been published previously. The aim of this study was to compare different software for the segmentation of the graft and design of the surgical template. Ten patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate were included. iPlan ENT was used for the first workflow and 3D Slicer and Blender for the second workflow. Every plan was done by two investigators. The planning time was compared between the two workflows and the two investigators. The results of the segmentation were compared by volumetric analysis. Planning with iPlan was significantly faster than 3D Slicer/Blender (P = 0.037 and P = 0.005, first and second planning by investigator 1; P = 0.017 for investigator 2). The median planning time for the experienced investigator was 297 s with iPlan and 390 s with 3D Slicer/Blender. The mean difference in graft volume was not significant (0.042 cm). The mean ± standard deviation Hausdorff distance was 1.52 ± 0.57 mm and Dice similarity coefficient was 0.91 ± 0.02. These results show that both workflows are viable.
牙槽骨植骨术是唇腭裂治疗中的关键步骤。此前已发表了一种用于设计理想植骨量和形状的手术模板的方法。本研究的目的是比较不同软件在植骨分割和手术模板设计方面的效果。纳入了10名单侧唇腭裂患者。第一种流程使用iPlan ENT,第二种流程使用3D Slicer和Blender。每个方案均由两名研究人员完成。比较了两种流程以及两名研究人员之间的规划时间。通过体积分析比较了分割结果。使用iPlan进行规划的速度明显快于3D Slicer/Blender(研究人员1的第一次和第二次规划,P = 0.037和P = 0.005;研究人员2,P = 0.017)。经验丰富的研究人员使用iPlan的中位规划时间为297秒,使用3D Slicer/Blender为390秒。植骨体积的平均差异不显著(0.042 cm)。平均±标准差豪斯多夫距离为1.52±0.57 mm,骰子相似系数为0.91±0.02。这些结果表明两种流程都是可行的。