Effects of rigid fixation device composition on three-dimensional computed axial tomography imaging: direct measurements on a pig model

Metals used in maxillofacial surgery

The goal of maxillofacial surgery is to restore the shape and functionality of maxillofacial region. In the past years, there has been a tremendous progress in this field because of significant advances in biotechnology that provided innovative biomaterials to efficiently reconstruct the maxillofacial injured region. By using appropriate selection of the implant biomaterial, it is possible to reconstruct the native tissue, both in form and function. The ideal biomaterial should mimic native tissues regarding density, strength, and modulus of elasticity. Autografts are currently the gold standard for replacement of missing tissues, but synthetic biomaterials have been widely used because they eliminate the discomfort to take the replacement tissue from the donor site. Among synthetic biomaterials, different metals may be utilized to efficiently reconstruct the maxillofacial injured region. This article makes an effort to summarize the most important metals in use in maxillofacial surgery, and point out advantages and disadvantage of each type.

The use of computed tomography to define zygomatic complex position

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the use of midline references and landmarks to assess the position of the zygomatic complex relative to the cranial base, and to test the reliability of these measurements in assessing facial symmetry.

METHODS

Direct skull measurements were compared with measurements made on computed tomography (CT) images. The effect of CT scanner error, technologist error, gantry angle error, error of skull inclination, and error due to the presence of titanium rigid fixation hardware were assessed. To test observer variation and the effect of each level of error, 4 blinded bilateral measurements were repeated 3 times by 5 observers on both dry skull and CT scans. A mixed effect analysis of variance model then assessed for effect of method of measurement (dry skull vs CT), observer, CT scanner, technologist, gantry angle, skull inclination, and rigid fixation.

RESULTS

A total of 2,040 measurements were made. Measurements for zygomatic complex posterior and anterior width and height were reliable and had an interobserver variations of 0.02 +/- 0.03 mm, 0.5 +/- 0.4 mm, and 0.37 +/- 0.3 mm, respectively. The difference between dry skull and CT assessment for the 3 reliable measurements was 1.2 +/- 0.3 mm, 0.44 +/- 0.4 mm, and 1.1 +/- 0.5 mm, respectively. The errors produced by the CT scanner, technologist, and rigid internal fixation hardware were not clinically significant. The measurements were not sensitive to gantry angle and skull inclination changes of 10 degrees or less. A fourth measurement assessing zygomatic complex projection was found not to be accurate or reliable.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the 3 CT scan measurements describing the position of the zygomatic complex relative to the cranial base are clinically useful.

The accuracy of measurements of three-dimensional computed tomography reconstructions

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of linear measurements obtained from three-dimensional reconstructions of computed tomography (CT) scans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten rectangular acrylic blocks were prepared with titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA) markers spaced from 1 to 10 mm, respectively. A plastic sphere was prepared with 10 sets of TMA markers spaced at variable intervals of 1 to 10 mm. Each object was scanned three times at 3-mm slice thicknesses and 1.5 mm with 0.5 mm overlap slice thicknesses, as well as positioned in the CT scanner in two different directions (perpendicular and parallel) to the scanning beam. Intermarker distances of the reconstructed objects were then measured using the measurement tool of the MediCAD software and compared with measurements taken by hand with a vernier caliper.

RESULTS

Using the 3-mm cut protocol, the data indicated that inconsistency exists between intermarker distance in the scans when the rectangular objects were scanned parallel to the scanning beam. This finding was not seen using the 1.5-mm with 0.5-mm overlap slice thickness protocol. The intermarker distances for objects scanned perpendicular to the scanning beam were consistent but subject to demagnification in the range of 17% to 20% for both scanning protocols.

CONCLUSION

The orientation of the object to the scanning beam and slice thickness protocol appear to have an impact on the accuracy and variability of linear measurements taken in the x, y, z axes.