Literature DB >> 12086325

Comparison of CT scanograms and cephalometric radiographs in craniofacial imaging.

J J Chidiac1, F S Shofer, A Al-Kutoub, L L Laster, J Ghafari.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare measurements from human skulls and their images from cephalometric radiographs (CR) and computed tomography (CT) scanograms, in order to gauge the potential clinical use of the latter.
DESIGN: Based on specific inclusion criteria, including stable centric occlusion, 13 adult skulls were selected from a larger collection. The mandible was taped to the maxilla after securing the occlusion of teeth and condylar seating in the glenoid fossa. Lateral and posteroanterior cephalographs and CT 'scout views' were taken of each skull by standardized methods. Landmarks were identified on skulls and images. OUTCOME MEASURES: Linear measurements were made on all three records; angular measurements only on CR and CT images. Intraclass correlation coefficients (r) were calculated to assess similarity among records. Paired t-tests were used to compare differences between mean measurements.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were noted between mean angular values on CR and CT views (P > 0.05). The highest correlations were observed for several vertical midline distances between CT and direct skull measures: 0.82 < r < 0.995-greatest for nasion-menton. For sagittal distances, the highest correlation was between the direct measure of condylion-pogonion and its CR image (r= 0.73). Correlations between CR and skull transverse measures were higher (0.46 < r < 0.80) than the corresponding skull vs. CT measures (0.06 < r < 0.38). CT and CR images are 2D slices and projections, respectively, of 3D structures. Vertical CT and skull measures correspond because the CT projection reflects a 1:1 ratio in the midsagittal plane; CT projected lateral images are smaller than the skull measures. The CR image reflects a distortion (approximately 8%) that brings Co-Pg closer to its anatomic distance, inadvertently contributing to better clinical planning, particularly in orthognathic surgery. The pattern of distortion of PA images was in opposite directions for CR and CT views.
CONCLUSIONS: Cephalograms and CT scanograms are close in depicting angular relations of structures, but they differ in the accuracy of imaging linear measurements, because the location and size of an object within the imaged 3D structure varies with both records. Logistic and economic considerations favor the use of cephalographs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12086325     DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0544.2002.01170.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res        ISSN: 1601-6335            Impact factor:   1.826


  15 in total

1.  Comparison of linear and angular measurements using two-dimensional conventional methods and three-dimensional cone beam CT images reconstructed from a volumetric rendering program in vivo.

Authors:  U Oz; K Orhan; N Abe
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Influence of a programme of professional calibration in the variability of landmark identification using cone beam computed tomography-synthesized and conventional radiographic cephalograms.

Authors:  E L Delamare; G S Liedke; M B Vizzotto; H L D da Silveira; J L D Ribeiro; H E D Silveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  Computerized tomography scout view for determining distal femoral resection angle in intramedullary instrumentation of total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  M Murad Uslu; Baris Ozsar; Meric Cirpar; Simay Kara; Fatih Eksioglu; Ozgur Cetik
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-08-22       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Use of pattern recognition and neural networks for non-metric sex diagnosis from lateral shape of calvarium: an innovative model for computer-aided diagnosis in forensic and physical anthropology.

Authors:  Fabio Cavalli; Luca Lusnig; Edmondo Trentin
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 2.686

5.  3D analysis of condylar position after sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible in mono- and bimaxillary orthognathic surgery - a methodology study in 18 patients.

Authors:  Florian Guy Draenert; Christina Erbe; Viola Zenglein; Peer W Kämmerer; Susanne Wriedt; Bilal Al Nawas
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 1.938

6.  Comparison of manual, digital and lateral CBCT cephalometric analyses.

Authors:  Ricardo de Lima Navarro; Paula Vanessa Pedron Oltramari-Navarro; Thais Maria Freire Fernandes; Giovani Fidelis de Oliveira; Ana Cláudia de Castro Ferreira Conti; Marcio Rodrigues de Almeida; Renato Rodrigues de Almeida
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.698

7.  Conventional frontal radiographs compared with frontal radiographs obtained from cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Metin Nur; Saadettin Kayipmaz; Mehmet Bayram; Mevlut Celikoglu; Dogan Kilkis; Omer Said Sezgin
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 2.079

8.  Validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements performed in full and hemifacial reconstructions derived from cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Laura Ricardina Ramírez-Sotelo; Solange Almeida; Gláucia Maria Ambrosano; Frab Bóscolo
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Comparison of common hard tissue cephalometric measurements between computed tomography 3D reconstruction and conventional 2D cephalometric images.

Authors:  Oded Yitschaky; Meir Redlich; Yossi Abed; Marina Faerman; Nardy Casap; Nurith Hiller
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  From 2D to 3D: an algorithm to derive normal values for 3-dimensional computerized assessment.

Authors:  Bruno Frazäo Gribel; Marcos Nadler Gribel; Flavio Ricardo Manzi; Sharon L Brooks; James A McNamara
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.