DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Intraoperative navigation in craniofacial surgery

  • Dong Hee Kang (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Dankook University Hospital)
  • Received : 2024.09.04
  • Accepted : 2024.10.11
  • Published : 2024.10.20

Abstract

Craniofacial surgery requires comprehensive anatomical knowledge of the head and neck to ensure patient safety and surgical precision. Over recent decades, there have been significant advancements in imaging techniques and the development of real-time surgical navigation systems. Intraoperative navigation technology aligns surgical instruments with imaging-derived information on patient anatomy, enabling surgeons to closely follow preoperative plans. This system functions as a radiologic map, improving the accuracy of instrument placement and minimizing surgical complications. The introduction of first-generation navigation systems in the early 1990s revolutionized surgical procedures by enabling real-time tracking of instruments using preoperative imaging. Initially utilized in neurosurgery, intraoperative navigation has since become standard practice in otolaryngology, cranio-maxillofacial surgery, and orthopedics. Since the 2000s, second-generation navigation systems have been developed to meet the growing demand for precision across various surgical specialties. The adoption of these systems in craniofacial surgery has been slower, but their use is increasing, particularly in procedures such as foreign body removal, facial bone fracture reconstruction, tumor resection, and craniofacial reconstruction and implantation. In Korea, insurance coverage for navigation in craniofacial surgery began in 2021, and new medical technologies for orbital wall fracture treatment were approved in August 2022. These technologies have only recently become clinically available, but are expected to play an increasingly important role in craniofacial surgery. Intraoperative navigation enhances operative insight, improves target localization, and increases surgical safety. Although these systems have a steep learning curve and initially prolong surgery, efficiency improves with experience. Calibration issues, registration errors, and soft tissue deformation can introduce inaccuracies. Nonetheless, navigation technology is evolving, and the integration of intraoperative computed tomography data holds promise for further enhancements of surgical accuracy. This paper discusses the various types and applications of navigation employed in craniofacial surgery, highlighting their benefits and limitations.

Keywords

References

  1. Mezger U, Jendrewski C, Bartels M. Navigation in surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2013;398:501-14. 
  2. DeLong MR, Gandolfi BM, Barr ML, Datta N, Willson TD, Jarrahy R. Intraoperative image-guided navigation in craniofacial surgery: review and grading of the current literature. J Craniofac Surg 2019;30:465-72. 
  3. Bell RB. Computer planning and intraoperative navigation in cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2010;22:135-56. 
  4. Heiland M, Habermann CR, Schmelzle R. Indications and limitations of intraoperative navigation in maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62:1059-63. 
  5. Cai EZ, Koh YP, Hing EC, Low JR, Shen JY, Wong HC, et al. Computer-assisted navigational surgery improves outcomes in orbital reconstructive surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2012;23:1567-73. 
  6. Kim YH, Jung DW, Kim TG, Lee JH, Kim IK. Correction of orbital wall fracture close to the optic canal using computer-assisted navigation surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2013;24:1118-22. 
  7. Kang DH. Orbital wall restoring surgery with primary orbital wall fragments in blowout fracture. Arch Craniofac Surg 2019;20:347-53. 
  8. Bevans SE, Moe KS. Advances in the reconstruction of orbital fractures. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017;25:513-35. 
  9. Mega Medical. Naviol [Internet]. Mega Medical; c2024 [cited 2024 Aug 21]. Available from: www.megamedical.co.kr 
  10. Dubron K, Van Camp P, Jacobs R, Politis C, Shaheen E. Accuracy of virtual planning and intraoperative navigation in zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: a systematic review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022;123:e841-8. 
  11. Yoon JH, Kang DH, Kim H. Sequencing of panfacial fracture surgery: a literature review and personal preference. Arch Craniofac Surg 2022;23:256-61. 
  12. Bobek SL. Applications of navigation for orthognathic surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2014;26:587-98. 
  13. Best DL, Lee KC, Reynolds RM, Piccillo E, Behar P, Markiewicz MR. Contemporary surgical management of craniofacial fibrous dysplasia using computer-assisted surgery and intraoperative navigation. J Craniofac Surg 2024;35:1280-3. 
  14. Cho SW, Choi WS, Kim BK. A multimodal approach to huge fibrous dysplasia with ocular symptoms using a navigation system and endoscope. J Craniofac Surg 2022;33:e342-5. 
  15. Park TH. How to reduce inferomedial orbital wall fracture using a navigation system: tips and pearls. J Craniofac Surg 2024;35:962-4.