ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2017
Design, development and clinical validation of computer-aided surgical simulation system for streamlined orthognathic surgical planning.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing the accuracy of genioplasty using mixed reality and computer-aided design/manufacturing: a randomized controlled trial.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Traditional and Artificial Intelligent Methods in Predicting Maxillofacial Soft Tissue Morphology After Orthognathic Surgery: A Narrative Review.International journal of dentistry · 2025Review
- Predicting optimal patient-specific postoperative facial landmarks for patients with craniomaxillofacial deformities.International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Improving Image Segmentation with Contextual and Structural Similarity.Pattern recognition · 2024Article
- Large Language Models Diagnose Facial Deformity.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Facial Changes Post-Orthognathic Surgery: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Effectively Diagnoses Mandibular Deformity Using Three-Dimensional Landmarks.Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2024Article
- Predicting Optimal Patient-Specific Postoperative Facial Landmarks for Patients with Craniomaxillofacial Deformities.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Synergy between artificial intelligence and precision medicine for computer-assisted oral and maxillofacial surgical planning.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Review
- Simulation of Postoperative Facial Appearances via Geometric Deep Learning for Efficient Orthognathic Surgical Planning.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2023Article
- Bidirectional prediction of facial and bony shapes for orthognathic surgical planning.Medical image analysis · 2023Article
- Localization of Craniomaxillofacial Landmarks on CBCT Images Using 3D Mask R-CNN and Local Dependency Learning.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2022Article
- Clinical feasibility evaluation of digital dental articulation for three-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery: a proof-of-concept study.International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2022Article
- Midsagittal Plane First: Building a Strong Facial Reference Frame for Computer-Aided Surgical Simulation.Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2022Article
- The Use of Surgical Splints in Orthognathic Surgery: A Bibliometric Study.Indian journal of plastic surgery : official publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India · 2022Review
- Fast and Accurate Craniomaxillofacial Landmark Detection via 3D Faster R-CNN.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2021Article
- SkullEngine: A Multi-Stage CNN Framework for Collaborative CBCT Image Segmentation and Landmark Detection.Machine learning in medical imaging. MLMI (Workshop) · 2021Article
- Mixed reality and three dimensional printed models for resection of maxillary tumor: a case report.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021Article
- Estimating Reference Shape Model for Personalized Surgical Reconstruction of Craniomaxillofacial Defects.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2021Article
- Design and manufacture of dental-supported surgical guide for genioplasty.Journal of dental sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere are many proven problems associated with traditional surgical planning methods for orthognathic surgery. To address these problems, we developed a computer-aided surgical simulation (CASS) system, the AnatomicAligner, to plan orthognathic surgery following our streamlined clinical protocol.
methodsThe system includes six modules: image segmentation and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction, registration and reorientation of models to neutral head posture, 3D cephalometric analysis, virtual osteotomy, surgical simulation, and surgical splint generation. The accuracy of the system was validated in a stepwise fashion: first to evaluate the accuracy of AnatomicAligner using 30 sets of patient data, then to evaluate the fitting of splints generated by AnatomicAligner using 10 sets of patient data. The industrial gold standard system, Mimics, was used as the reference.
resultWhen comparing the results of segmentation, virtual osteotomy and transformation achieved with AnatomicAligner to the ones achieved with Mimics, the absolute deviation between the two systems was clinically insignificant. The average surface deviation between the two models after 3D model reconstruction in AnatomicAligner and Mimics was 0.3 mm with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.03 mm. All the average surface deviations between the two models after virtual osteotomy and transformations were smaller than 0.01 mm with a SD of 0.01 mm. In addition, the fitting of splints generated by AnatomicAligner was at least as good as the ones generated by Mimics.
conclusionWe successfully developed a CASS system, the AnatomicAligner, for planning orthognathic surgery following the streamlined planning protocol. The system has been proven accurate. AnatomicAligner will soon be available freely to the boarder clinical and research communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.