삼차원 전산화단층촬영사진과 측모두부 방사선규격사진의 계측자에 따른 계측오차에 대한 비교분석
Comparison of the observer reliability of cranial anatomic landmarks based on cephalometric radiograph and three-dimensional computed tomography scans
2
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Introduction: Accurate diagnosis and treatment planning are very important for orthognathic surgery. A small error in diagnosis can cause postoperative functional and esthetic problems. Pre-existing 2-dimensional (D) chephalogram analysis has a high likelihood of error due to its intrinsic and extrinsic problems. A cephalogram can also be inaccurate due to the limited anatomic points, superimposition of the image, and the considerable time and effort required. Recently, an improvement in technology and popularization of computed tomography (CT) provides patients with 3-D computer based cephalometric analysis, which complements traditional analysis in many ways. However, the results are affected by the experience and the subject of the investigator . Materials and Methods: The effects of the sources human error in 2-D cephalogram analysis and 3-D computerized tomography cephalometric analysis were compared using Simplant CMF program. From 2008 Jan to 2009 June, patients who had undergone CT, cephalo AP, lat were investigated. Results:1. In the 3 D and 2 D images, 10 out of 93 variables (10.4%) and 11 out 44 variables (25%), respectively, showed a significant difference. 2. Landmarks that showed a significant difference in the 2 D image were the points frequently superimposed anatomically. 3. Go Po Orb landmarks, which showed a significant difference in the 3 D images, were found to be the artificial points for analysis in the 2 D image,and in the current definition, these points cannot be used for reproducibility in the 3 D image. Conclusion: Generally, 3-D CT images provide more precise identification of the traditional cephalometric landmark. Greater variability of certain landmarks in the mediolateral direction is probably related to the inadequate definition of the landmarks in the third dimension.
Abstract
Introduction: Accurate diagnosis and treatment planning are very important for orthognathic surgery. A small error in diagnosis can cause postoperative functional and esthetic problems. Pre-existing 2-dimensional (D) chephalogram analysis has a high likelihood of error due to its intrinsic and extrinsic problems. A cephalogram can also be inaccurate due to the limited anatomic points, superimposition of the image, and the considerable time and effort required. Recently, an improvement in technology and popularization of computed tomography (CT) provides patients with 3-D computer based cephalometric analysis, which complements traditional analysis in many ways. However, the results are affected by the experience and the subject of the investigator . Materials and Methods: The effects of the sources human error in 2-D cephalogram analysis and 3-D computerized tomography cephalometric analysis were compared using Simplant CMF program. From 2008 Jan to 2009 June, patients who had undergone CT, cephalo AP, lat were investigated. Results:1. In the 3 D and 2 D images, 10 out of 93 variables (10.4%) and 11 out 44 variables (25%), respectively, showed a significant difference. 2. Landmarks that showed a significant difference in the 2 D image were the points frequently superimposed anatomically. 3. Go Po Orb landmarks, which showed a significant difference in the 3 D images, were found to be the artificial points for analysis in the 2 D image,and in the current definition, these points cannot be used for reproducibility in the 3 D image. Conclusion: Generally, 3-D CT images provide more precise identification of the traditional cephalometric landmark. Greater variability of certain landmarks in the mediolateral direction is probably related to the inadequate definition of the landmarks in the third dimension.
참고문헌 (25)
- Grayson BH, "Analysis of craniofacial asymmetry by multiplane cephalometry", Am J Orthod, 84, pp.217~224 (1983)
- Baumrind S, "Three-dimensional x-ray stereometry from paired coplanar images: a progress report", Am J Orthod, 84, pp.292~312 (1983)
- Baumrind S, "The geometry of three-dimensional measurement from paired coplanar x-ray images", Am J Orthod, 84, pp.313~322 (1983)
- Moss JP, "Three-dimensional visualization of the face and skull using computerized tomography and laser scanning techniques", Eur J Orthord, 9, pp.247~253 (1987)
- Grayson B, "The three-dimensional cephalogram: theory, technique, and clinical application", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 94, pp.327~337 (1988)
- Bookstein FL, "Landmarks in three dimension: recontruction from cephalograms versus direct observation", Am J Orthord Dentofacial Orthop, 100, pp.133~140 (1991)
- Ferrario VF, "Distance from symmetry: a three-dimensional evaluation of facial asymmetry", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 52, pp.1126~1132 (1994)
- Ferrario VF, "Threedimensional facial morphometry and conventional cephalometrics: a correlation study", Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 11, pp.329~338 (1996)
- Kusnoto B, "Assessment of 3- dimensional computer-generated cephalometric measurement", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 116, pp.390~399 (1999)
- Cavalcanti MG, "Quantitative analysis of spiral computed tomography for craniofacial clinical applications", Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 27, pp.344~350 (1998)
- Nawaratne S, "Accuracy of volume measurement using helical CT", J Comput Assist Tomogr, 21, pp.481~486 (1997)
- Xia J, "Computer-assisted three-dimensional surgical planning and stimulation 3D virtual osteotomy", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 29, pp.11~17 (2000)
- Katsumata A, "3D-CT evaluation of facial asymmetry", Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 99, pp.212~220 (2005)
- Kawamata A, "Three-dimensional computed tomography imaging in dentistry", Dent Clin North Am, 44, pp.395~440 (2000)
- Kawamata A, "Three-dimensional imaging for orthognathic surgery and orthodontic treatment", Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 13, pp.713~725 (2001)
- Matteson SR, "A method for three dimensional image reformation for quantitative cephalometric analysis", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 47, pp.1053~1061 (1989)
- Hildebolt CF, "Validation study of skull three-dimensional computerized tomography measurements", Am J Phys Anthropol, 82, pp.283~294 (1990)
- Cavalcanti MG, "Three-dimensional computed tomography landmark measurement in craniofacial surgical planning experimental validation in vitro", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 57, pp.690~694 (1999)
- Song JC, "Evaluation of the accuracy and reliability of 3-dimensional computerized tomography for measurement of maxillofacial region", J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg, 22, pp.500~512 (2000)
- Christiansen EL, "Intra-and inter-observer variability and accuracy in the determination of linear and angular measurements in computed tomography. An in vitro and in situ study of human mandibles", Acta Odontol Scand, 44, pp.221~229 (1986)
- Richtsmeier JT, "Precision, repeatabillity and validation of the localization of cranial landmarks using computed tomography scans", Cleft Palate Craniofac J, 32, pp.217~227 (1995)
- Kragskov J, "Comparison of the reliability of craniofacial anatomic landmarks based on cephalometric radiographs and three-dimensional CT scans", Cleft Palate Craniofac J, 34, pp.111~116 (1997)
- Papadopoulos MA, "Three-dimensional fetal cephalometry: an evaluation of the reliability of cephalometric measurements based on three-dimensional CT reconstructions and on dry skulls of sheep fetuses", J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 33, pp.229~237 (2005)
- Midtgard J, "Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks and errors of measurements of cephalometric cranial distances", Angle Orthod, 44, pp.56~61 (1974)
- Ha ¨gg U, "The reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks: an experimental study on skulls", Aust Orthod J, 15, pp.177~185 (1998)