The purpose of this study was to present and validate an innovative semi-automatic approach to quantify the accuracy of the surgical outcome in relation to 3D virtual orthognathic planning among patients who underwent bimaxillary surgery. For the validation of this new semi-automatic approach, CBCT scans of ten patients who underwent bimaxillary surgery were acquired pre-operatively. Individualized 3D virtual operation plans were made for all patients prior to surgery. During surgery, the maxillary and mandibular segments were positioned as planned by using 3D milled interocclusal wafers. Consequently, post-operative CBCT scan were acquired. The 3D rendered pre- and postoperative virtual head models were aligned by voxel-based registration upon the anterior cranial base. To calculate the discrepancies between the 3D planning and the actual surgical outcome, the 3D planned maxillary and mandibular segments were segmented and superimposed upon the postoperative maxillary and mandibular segments. The translation matrices obtained from this registration process were translated into translational and rotational discrepancies between the 3D planning and the surgical outcome, by using the newly developed tool, the OrthoGnathicAnalyser. To evaluate the reproducibility of this method, the process was performed by two independent observers multiple times. Low intra-observer and inter-observer variations in measurement error (mean error < 0.25 mm) and high intraclass correlation coefficients (> 0.97) were found, supportive of the observer independent character of the OrthoGnathicAnalyser. The pitch of the maxilla and mandible showed the highest discrepancy between the 3D planning and the postoperative results, 2.72° and 2.75° respectively. This novel method provides a reproducible tool for the evaluation of bimaxillary surgery, making it possible to compare larger patient groups in an objective and time-efficient manner in order to optimize the current workflow in orthognathic surgery.

To present and validate a semi-automatic segmentation protocol to enable an accurate 3D reconstruction of the mandibular condyles using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Approval from the regional medical ethics review board was obtained for this study. Bilateral mandibular condyles in ten CBCT datasets of patients were segmented using the currently proposed semi-automatic segmentation protocol. This segmentation protocol combined 3D region-growing and local thresholding algorithms. The segmentation of a total of twenty condyles was performed by two observers. The Dice-coefficient and distance map calculations were used to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of the segmented and 3D rendered condyles. The mean inter-observer Dice-coefficient was 0.98 (range [0.95–0.99]). An average 90^th percentile distance of 0.32 mm was found, indicating an excellent inter-observer similarity of the segmented and 3D rendered condyles. No systematic errors were observed in the currently proposed segmentation protocol. The novel semi-automated segmentation protocol is an accurate and reproducible tool to segment and render condyles in 3D. The implementation of this protocol in the clinical practice allows the CBCT to be used as an imaging modality for the quantitative analysis of condylar morphology.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to validate a quick, accurate and reproducible (semi-) automatic software segmentation method to measure orbital volume in the unaffected bony orbit. Precise volume measurement of the orbital cavity is a useful addition to pre-operative planning and intraoperative navigation in orbital reconstruction. Methods In 21 CT scans, one unaffected orbit was selected to compare manual segmentation (gold standard) with three segmentation methods using iPlan software (version 3.0.5; Brainlab, Feldkirchen, Germany): automatic (method A), automatic minus bone/air masks (method SA) and automatic minus masks followed by manual adjustments (method SAA). First, validation of the manual segmentation and a newly described method for the anterior boundary was performed. Subsequently the accuracy, reproducibility and time efficiency of the methods were examined. Measurements were performed by two observers. Results The intraclass correlation for the interobserver agreement of the anterior boundary was 0.992, and the intraobserver and interobserver agreement for the manual segmentation were 0.997 and 0.994, respectively. Method A had an average volumetric difference of 0.49 cc (SD 0.74) in comparison with the gold standard; this was 0.24 cc (SD 0.27) for method SA and 0.86 cc (SD 0.27) for method SAA. The average time for each method was 38 (SD 5.4), 146 (SD 16.0) and 327 (SD 36.2) seconds per orbit. Conclusion The built-in automatic method A is quick, but suboptimal for clinical use. The newly developed method SA appears to be accurate, reproducible, quick and easy to use. Manual adjustments in method SAA are more time-consuming and do not improve volume accuracy. The largest volume discrepancy is located near the inferior orbital fissure.