# Virtual Surgical Planning in Orthognathic Surgery: Two Software Platforms Compared
## 3 Results
### Surgical Transfer  
The effectiveness of surgical planning appears to be comparable between the Dolphin Imaging and IPS software tools, with a slight preference for the latter software, showing an average evaluation value of 7.4 against the average value of 7.3 of the Dolphin Imaging software. A differential of 0.1 is, on the other hand, lower than the value of the SD (0.75), making the differential itself statistically irrelevant. The analysis of the results referring to the evaluation of occlusal splints in the operating room shows an absolute comparability, showing an average value of 7.25 for both pieces of software (Figure 1).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{_Dolphin Imaging_} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_IPS_} \\ \hline Cone Beam CT (minimum request) & Cone Beam CT (minimum request) \\ \hline
3D Facial Scans & 3D Facial Scans \\ \hline Oral Scans (minimum request) & Oral Scans (minimum request) \\ \hline Rx Orthopantomographic (optional) & Rx Orthopantomographic (not requested) \\ \hline Rx Telecranium AP-LL (optional) & Rx Telecranium AP-LL (not requested) \\ \hline Oclusal Scans (not requested) & Oclusal Scans (optional) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Fundamental investigation required for a complete surgical planning.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c|c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Time to Complete Planning**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Acquisition Time of CBCT**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Acquisition Time of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Acquisition Time of**} \\ \cline{3-11}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Dolphin** \\ **Imaging** \\ \end{tabular} } & **IPS** & **Variation** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Dolphin** \\ **Imaging** \\ \end{tabular} } & **IPS** & **Variation** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Dolphin** \\ **Imaging** \\ \end{tabular} } & **IPS** & **Variation** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Dolphin** \\ **Imaging** \\ \end{tabular} } & **IPS** & **Variation** \\ \hline Patient 1 & 231 m & 164 m & 67 m & 12.77 s & 14.21 s & 1.44 s & 4.20 s & 5.41 s & 1.21 s & 5.56 s & 7.02 s & 1.46 s \\ \hline Patient 2 & 116 m & 95 m & 21 m & 12.67 s & 15.01 s & 2.34 s & 4.10 s & 5.20 s & 1.10 s & 5.47 s & 6.49 s & 1.02 s \\ \hline Patient 3 & 97 m & 66 m & 31 m & 12.98 s & 14.69 s & 1.71 s & 4.23 s & 4.96 s & 0.73 s & 5.21 s & 6.78 s & 1.57 s \\ \hline Patient 4 & 55 m & 52 m & 3 m & 12.15 s & 14.10 s & 1.95 s & 4.57 s & 5.17 s & 0.60 s & 5.67 s & 7.59 s & 1.92 s \\ \hline Patient 5 & 58 m & 49 m & 9 m & 12.49 s & 14.43 s & 1.94 s & 4.13 s & 5.19 s & 1.06 s & 5.51 s & 7.14 s & 1.63 s \\ \hline Patient 6 & 50 m & 46 m & 4 m & 12.53 s & 14.73 s & 2.20 s & 3.87 s & 4.87 s & 1.00 s & 5.13 s & 6.86 s & 1.73 s \\ \hline Patient 7 & 57 m & 50 m & 7 m & 11.90 s & 15.08 s & 3.18 s & 4.27 s & 5.27 s & 1.00 s & 5.41 s & 7.17 s & 1.76 s \\ \hline Patient 8 & 49 m & 41 m & 8 m & 12.70 s & 14.20 s & 1.50 s & 3.97 s & 4.99 s & 1.02 s & 5.87 s & 6.93 s & 1.06 s \\ \hline Patient 9 & 52 m & 33 m & 19 m & 12.79 s & 14.63 s & 1.84 s & 4.21 s & 5.71 s & 1.50 s & 5.76 s & 6.74 s & 0.98 s \\ \hline Patient 10 & 44 m & 29 m & 15 m & 12.69 s & 15.19 s & 2.50 s & 4.25 s & 5.35 s & 1.10 s & 5.49 s & 7.18 s & 1.69 s \\ \hline Average & 809(\(\pm\)5.7) & 625(\(\pm\)402) & 184(\(\pm\)192) & 12.57 \(\pm\) & 14.63 \(\pm\) & 2.06 \(\pm\) & 4.18 \(\pm\) & 5.21 \(\pm\) & 1.03 \(\pm\) & 5.51 \(\pm\) & 6.99 \(\pm\) & 1.46 \(\pm\) \\ time & min & min & min & 0.32 s & 0.39 s & 0.52 s & 0.19 s & 0.26 s & 0.24 s & 0.23 s & 0.30 s & 0.46 s \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Software comparison data: planning time, acquisition time for CBCT, intraoral scan, facial scan.