Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography cephalometric measurements using a midsagittal projection and conventional two-dimensional cephalometric measurements
2
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objective: This study investigated whether it is possible to use a twodimensional (2D) standard in three-dimensional (3D) analysis, by comparing the angles and lengths measured from a midsagittal projection in 3D cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with those measured by 2D lateral cephalometric radiography (LCR). Methods: Fifty patients who underwent both LCR and CBCT were selected as subjects. CBCT was reoriented in 3 different methods and the measuring-points were projected onto the midsagittal plane. Twelve angle values and 8 length values were measured on both LCR and CBCT and compared. Results: Repeated measures analysis of the variance revealed statistically significant differences in 7 angular and 5 linear measurements among LCR and 3 types of CBCT (p < 0.05). Of these 12 measurements, multiple comparisons showed that 6 measurements (ANB, AB to FH, IMPA, FMA, Co-Gn, Go-Me) were not significantly different in pairwise comparisons. LCR was significantly different from 3 types of CBCT in 3 angular (SN to FH, interincisal angle, FMIA) and 2 linear (S-Go, Co-ANS) measurements. The CBCT method was similar for all measurements, except for 1 linear measurement, i.e., S-N. However, the disparity between the mean values for all parameters was within the range of clinical measurement error. Conclusions: 3D-CBCT analysis, using midsagittal projection, is a useful method in which the 2D-LCR normative values can be used. Although the measurements changed with reorientation, these changes were not clinically significant. [Korean J Orthod 2015;45(6):282-288]
Abstract
Objective: This study investigated whether it is possible to use a twodimensional (2D) standard in three-dimensional (3D) analysis, by comparing the angles and lengths measured from a midsagittal projection in 3D cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with those measured by 2D lateral cephalometric radiography (LCR). Methods: Fifty patients who underwent both LCR and CBCT were selected as subjects. CBCT was reoriented in 3 different methods and the measuring-points were projected onto the midsagittal plane. Twelve angle values and 8 length values were measured on both LCR and CBCT and compared. Results: Repeated measures analysis of the variance revealed statistically significant differences in 7 angular and 5 linear measurements among LCR and 3 types of CBCT (p < 0.05). Of these 12 measurements, multiple comparisons showed that 6 measurements (ANB, AB to FH, IMPA, FMA, Co-Gn, Go-Me) were not significantly different in pairwise comparisons. LCR was significantly different from 3 types of CBCT in 3 angular (SN to FH, interincisal angle, FMIA) and 2 linear (S-Go, Co-ANS) measurements. The CBCT method was similar for all measurements, except for 1 linear measurement, i.e., S-N. However, the disparity between the mean values for all parameters was within the range of clinical measurement error. Conclusions: 3D-CBCT analysis, using midsagittal projection, is a useful method in which the 2D-LCR normative values can be used. Although the measurements changed with reorientation, these changes were not clinically significant. [Korean J Orthod 2015;45(6):282-288]
참고문헌 (27)
- Broadbent BH, "A new x-ray technique and its application to orthodontia", Angle Orthod, 1, pp.45~66 (1931)
- Geelen W, "Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique", Eur J Orthod, 20, pp.331~340 (1998)
- Yoon YJ, "Effect of head rotation on lateral cephalometric radiographs", Angle Orthod, 71, pp.396~403 (2001)
- Halazonetis DJ, "From 2-dimensional cephalograms to 3-dimensional computed tomography scans", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 127, pp.627~637 (2005)
- 박태준, "A method for mandibular dental arch superimposition using 3D cone beam CT and orthodontic 3D digital model", 대한치과교정학회지, 42(4), pp.169~181 (2012), 대한치과교정학회[DOI]
- Jin Hwan Choi, "Three-dimensional evaluation of maxillary anterior alveolar bone for optimal placement of miniscrew implants", 대한치과교정학회지, 44(2), pp.54~61 (2014), 대한치과교정학회
- Pinsky HM, "Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT", Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 35, pp.410~416 (2006)
- Periago DR, "Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program", Angle Orthod, 78, pp.387~395 (2008)
- Brown AA, "Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3D images", Angle Orthod, 79, pp.150~157 (2009)
- de Oliveira AE, "Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography", Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 107, pp.256~265 (2009)
- Kumar V, "Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms", Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 36, pp.263~269 (2007)
- van Vlijmen OJ, "Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from conebeam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 67, pp.92~97 (2009)
- Grauer D, "Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms", Angle Orthod, 80, pp.286~294 (2010)
- Kumar V, "In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms", Angle Orthod, 78, pp.873~879 (2008)
- Ramírez-Sotelo LR, "Validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements performed in full and hemifacial reconstructions derived from cone beam computed tomography", Angle Orthod, 82, pp.827~832 (2012)
- Zamora N, "Cephalometric measurements from 3D reconstructed images compared with conventional 2D images", Angle Orthod, 81, pp.856~864 (2011)
- Nalçaci R, "A comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurements", Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 39, pp.100~106 (2010)
- Yitschaky O, "Comparison of common hard tissue cephalometric measurements between computed tomography 3D reconstruction and conventional 2D cephalometric images", Angle Orthod, 81, pp.11~16 (2011)
- Gribel BF, "From 2D to 3D: an algorithm to derive normal values for 3-dimensional computerized assessment", Angle Orthod, 81, pp.3~10 (2011)
- Lee JK, "Three-dimensional cone beam computed tomographic image reorientation using soft tissues as reference for facial asymmetry diagnosis", Angle Orthod, 84, pp.38~47 (2014)
- Albarakati SF, "The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements:a comparison of conventional and digital methods", Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 41, pp.11~17 (2012)
- Damstra J, "Comparison between two-dimensional and midsagittal three-dimensional cephalometric measurements of dry human skulls", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 49, pp.392~395 (2011)
- Olmez H, "Measurement accuracy of a computer-assisted three-dimensional analysis and a conventional twodimensional method", Angle Orthod, 81, pp.375~382 (2011)
- Chate RA, "Cephalometric landmark identification within the petrous temporal region", Br J Orthod, 14, pp.33~41 (1987)
- Stabrun AE, "Precision in cephalometric landmark identification", Eur J Orthod, 4, pp.185~196 (1982)
- Dibbets JM, "Comparison of linear cephalometric dimensions in Americans of European descent (Ann Arbor, Cleveland, Philadelphia) and Americans of African descent (Nashville)", Angle Orthod, 72, pp.324~330 (2002)
- 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)