Literature DB >> 19732656

Precision of cephalometric landmark identification: cone-beam computed tomography vs conventional cephalometric views.

John B Ludlow1, Maritzabel Gubler, Lucia Cevidanes, André Mol.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we compared the precision of landmark identification using displays of multi-planar cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) volumes and conventional lateral cephalograms (Ceph).
METHODS: Twenty presurgical orthodontic patients were radiographed with conventional Ceph and CBCT techniques. Five observers plotted 24 landmarks using computer displays of multi-planer reconstruction (MPR) CBCT and Ceph views during separate sessions. Absolute differences between each observer's plot and the mean of all observers were averaged as 1 measure of variability (ODM). The absolute difference of each observer from any other observer was averaged as a second measure of variability (DEO). ANOVA and paired t tests were used to analyze variability differences.
RESULTS: Radiographic modality and landmark were significant at P <0.0001 for DEO and ODM calculations. DEO calculations of observer variability were consistently greater than ODM. The overall correlation of 1920 paired ODM and DEO measurements was excellent at 0.972. All bilateral landmarks had increased precision when identified in the MPR views. Mediolateral variability was statistically greater than anteroposterior or caudal-cranial variability for 5 landmarks in the MPR views.
CONCLUSIONS: The MPR displays of CBCT volume images provide generally more precise identification of traditional cephalometric landmarks. More precise location of condylion, gonion, and orbitale overcomes the problem of superimposition of these bilateral landmarks seen in Ceph. Greater variability of certain landmarks in the mediolateral direction is probably related to inadequate definition of the landmarks in the third dimension.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19732656      PMCID: PMC2753840          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.12.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  26 in total

1.  Comparison of radiation levels from computed tomography and conventional dental radiographs.

Authors:  Daniel C S Ngan; Om P Kharbanda; Joseph P Geenty; M Ali Darendeliler
Journal:  Aust Orthod J       Date:  2003-11

2.  Radiographic examination of the temporomandibular joint using cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  K Tsiklakis; K Syriopoulos; H C Stamatakis
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks and errors of measurements of cephalometric cranial distances.

Authors:  J Midtgård; G Björk; S Linder-Aronson
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification.

Authors:  S Baumrind; R C Frantz
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1971-08

5.  Natural head position and natural head orientation: basic considerations in cephalometric analysis and research.

Authors:  A Lundström; F Lundström; L M Lebret; C F Moorrees
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Enlargement and distortion in cephalometric radiography: compensation tables for linear measurements.

Authors:  E O Bergersen
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements.

Authors:  W J Houston
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1983-05

8.  Subtraction radiography to assess reproducibility of patient positioning in cephalometrics.

Authors:  M L Kantor; C L Phillips; W R Proffit
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation.

Authors:  John B Ludlow; Laura E Davies-Ludlow; Stuart C White
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.634

10.  Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography.

Authors:  Ana Emilia F de Oliveira; Lucia Helena S Cevidanes; Ceib Phillips; Alexandre Motta; Brandon Burke; Donald Tyndall
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2008-08-20
View more
  55 in total

1.  3D cephalometric analysis obtained from computed tomography. Review of the literature.

Authors:  Giulia Rossini; Costanza Cavallini; Michele Cassetta; Ersilia Barbato
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2012-01-27

2.  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

Review 3.  Modern dental imaging: a review of the current technology and clinical applications in dental practice.

Authors:  Bart Vandenberghe; Reinhilde Jacobs; Hilde Bosmans
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Accuracy of 3D cephalometric measurements based on an automatic knowledge-based landmark detection algorithm.

Authors:  Abhishek Gupta; Om Prakash Kharbanda; Viren Sardana; Rajiv Balachandran; Harish Kumar Sardana
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  Accuracy and repeatability of computer aided cervical vertebra landmarking in cephalogram.

Authors:  Lili Chen; Zhicong Lan; Xiangyang Xu; Jiuxiang Lin; Huaifei Hu
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2012-01-27

6.  Morphometric analysis of treatment effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction in growing Class III patients.

Authors:  T Baccetti; H J De Clerck; L H Cevidanes; L Franchi
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2010-12-27       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Comparison of observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on subject images from Galileos and i-CAT cone beam CT.

Authors:  R A Katkar; C Kummet; D Dawson; L Moreno Uribe; V Allareddy; M Finkelstein; A Ruprecht
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  A knowledge-based algorithm for automatic detection of cephalometric landmarks on CBCT images.

Authors:  Abhishek Gupta; Om Prakash Kharbanda; Viren Sardana; Rajiv Balachandran; Harish Kumar Sardana
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 2.924

9.  Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms.

Authors:  Dan Grauer; Lucia S H Cevidanes; Martin A Styner; Inam Heulfe; Eric T Harmon; Hongtu Zhu; William R Proffit
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  Three-dimensional localization of impacted canines and root resorption assessment using cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Eyad Almuhtaseb; Jing Mao; Derek Mahony; Rawan Bader; Zhi-Xing Zhang
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2014-06-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.