Download PDF
Semin Plast Surg
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1786804
Review Article

Computerized Surgical Planning in Gender Affirming Facial Surgery

Jacqueline M. Ihnat
1   Department of Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
,
Ali Aral
1   Department of Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
,
Thayer Mukherjee
1   Department of Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
,
Michael Alperovich
1   Department of Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
› Author Affiliations Funding This publication was made possible by CTSA Grant Number KL2 TR001862 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Computerized Surgical Planning (CSP) is a surgical tool that enables precise bony changes through the creation of custom cutting guides and/or custom plates. CSP has been shown to be a safe and effective tool in gender affirming facial surgery as well, specifically with regard to frontal sinus setback, zygomatic remodeling, genioplasty, and mandibular angle and body reshaping. CSP aids in trainee education, improves symmetry, reduces operative time, and can produce idealized results during complex revisions. Overall, CSP is a valuable tool in the field of gender affirming facial surgery that helps surgeons achieve optimal aesthetic and safety outcomes for patients.

Keywords

gender affirming facial surgery - computerized surgical planning - facial feminization


Publication History

Article published online:
13 May 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Townsend A, Tepper OM. Virtual surgical planning and three-dimensional printing in rhinoplasty. Semin Plast Surg 2022; 36 (03) 158-163
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Alberti C. Three-dimensional CT and structure models. Br J Radiol 1980; 53 (627) 261-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Canfield Scientific, Inc. Vectra. 3D. Anywhere. 2023. Accessed April 17, 2024 at: https://www.canfieldsci.com/imaging-systems/vectra-h1-3d-imaging-system/
    PubMed
  • 4 Jones EA, Huang AT. Virtual surgical planning in head and neck reconstruction. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2023; 56 (04) 813-822
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Alperovich M. Commentary: virtual surgical planning and patient-specific implants in facial feminization surgery. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (S2): S20-S23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Vyas K, Gibreel W, Mardini S. Virtual surgical planning (VSP) in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2022; 30 (02) 239-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Thakker JS, Pace M, Lowe I, Jung P, Herford AS. Virtual surgical planning in maxillofacial trauma. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2019; 27 (02) 143-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cho RS, Lopez J, Musavi L. et al. Computer-assisted design and manufacturing assists less experienced surgeons in achieving equivalent outcomes in cranial vault reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg 2019; 30 (07) 2034-2038
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hammoudeh JA, Howell LK, Boutros S, Scott MA, Urata MM. Current status of surgical planning for orthognathic surgery: traditional methods versus 3d surgical planning. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2015; 3 (02) e307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bly RA, Chang SH, Cudejkova M, Liu JJ, Moe KS. Computer-guided orbital reconstruction to improve outcomes. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2013; 15 (02) 113-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Toto JM, Chang EI, Agag R, Devarajan K, Patel SA, Topham NS. Improved operative efficiency of free fibula flap mandible reconstruction with patient-specific, computer-guided preoperative planning. Head Neck 2015; 37 (11) 1660-1664
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Andrew TW, Baylan J, Mittermiller PA. et al. Virtual surgical planning decreases operative time for isolated single suture and multi-suture craniosynostosis repair. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2018; 6 (12) e2038
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chim H, Wetjen N, Mardini S. Virtual surgical planning in craniofacial surgery. Semin Plast Surg 2014; 28 (03) 150-158
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Myers PL, Nelson JA, Rosen EB, Allen Jr RJ, Disa JJ, Matros E. Virtual surgical planning for oncologic mandibular and maxillary reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021; 9 (09) e3672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Deschamps-Braly JC. Facial gender confirmation surgery: facial feminization surgery and facial masculinization surgery. Clin Plast Surg 2018; 45 (03) 323-331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Alper DP, Almeida MN, Hu KG. et al. Quantifying facial feminization surgery's impact: focus on patient facial satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2023; 11 (11) e5366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Chou DW, Bruss D, Tejani N, Brandstetter K, Kleinberger A, Shih C. Quality of life outcomes after facial feminization surgery. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (S2): S44-S46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Tawa P, Brault N, Luca-Pozner V. et al. Three-dimensional custom-made surgical guides in facial feminization surgery: prospective study on safety and accuracy. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41 (11) NP1368-NP1378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sharaf B, Kuruoglu D, Bite U, Morris JM. Point of care virtual surgical planning and 3d printing in facial feminization surgery. Semin Plast Surg 2022; 36 (03) 164-168
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Alnaif N, Zhou M, Galli R, Azzi AJ, Alamri A, Gilardino M. The role of preoperative computed tomography in nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. J Craniofac Surg 2019; 30 (02) 424-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Cheng H, Clymer JW, Po-Han Chen B. et al. Prolonged operative duration is associated with complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Surg Res 2018; 229: 134-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M. Understanding costs of care in the operating room. JAMA Surg 2018; 153 (04) e176233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gray R, Nguyen K, Lee JC. et al. Osseous transformation with facial feminization surgery: improved anatomical accuracy with virtual planning. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144 (05) 1159-1168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ousterhout DK. Feminization of the forehead: contour changing to improve female aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg 1987; 79 (05) 701-713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Dang BN, Hu AC, Bertrand AA. et al. Evaluation and treatment of facial feminization surgery: part I. forehead, orbits, eyebrows, eyes, and nose. Arch Plast Surg 2021; 48 (05) 503-510
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Louis M, Qiu CS, Travieso R, Marano D, Coon D. Computer-aided planning and execution in facial gender surgery: approaches, concepts, and implementation. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022; 10 (05) e4330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Dang BN, Hu AC, Bertrand AA. et al. Evaluation and treatment of facial feminization surgery: part II. lips, midface, mandible, chin, and laryngeal prominence. Arch Plast Surg 2022; 49 (01) 5-11
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Nguyen JD, Duong H. Anatomy, Head and Neck: Alveolar Nerve. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2023
    Google Scholar