OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the values of different measurements taken on three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) are comparable with those taken on two-dimensional (2D) images from conventional lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) and to examine if there are differences between the different types of CBCT software when taking those measurements. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eight patients were selected who had both an LRC and a CBCT. The 3D reconstructions of each patient in the CBCT were evaluated using two different software packages, NemoCeph 3D and InVivo5. An observer took 10 angular and 3 linear measurements on each of the three types of record on two different occasions. RESULTS: Intraobserver reliability was high except for the mandibular plane and facial cone (from the LCR), the Na-Ans distance (using NemoCeph 3D), and facial cone and the Ans-Me distance (using InVivo5). No statistically significant differences were found for the angular and linear measurements between the LCRs and the CBCTs for any measurement, and the correlation levels were high for all measurements. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences were found between the angular and linear measurements taken with the LCR and those taken with the CBCT. Neither were there any statistically significant differences between the angular or linear measurements using the two CBCT software packages.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the values of different measurements taken on three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) are comparable with those taken on two-dimensional (2D) images from conventional lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) and to examine if there are differences between the different types of CBCT software when taking those measurements. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eight patients were selected who had both an LRC and a CBCT. The 3D reconstructions of each patient in the CBCT were evaluated using two different software packages, NemoCeph 3D and InVivo5. An observer took 10 angular and 3 linear measurements on each of the three types of record on two different occasions. RESULTS: Intraobserver reliability was high except for the mandibular plane and facial cone (from the LCR), the Na-Ans distance (using NemoCeph 3D), and facial cone and the Ans-Me distance (using InVivo5). No statistically significant differences were found for the angular and linear measurements between the LCRs and the CBCTs for any measurement, and the correlation levels were high for all measurements. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences were found between the angular and linear measurements taken with the LCR and those taken with the CBCT. Neither were there any statistically significant differences between the angular or linear measurements using the two CBCT software packages.
Authors: Robert A Mischkowski; Reinhard Pulsfort; Lutz Ritter; Jörg Neugebauer; Hans Georg Brochhagen; Erwin Keeve; Joachim E Zöller Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2007-07-05
Authors: O J C van Vlijmen; T Maal; S J Bergé; E M Bronkhorst; C Katsaros; A M Kuijpers-Jagtman Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2009-12-30 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Danielle R Periago; William C Scarfe; Mazyar Moshiri; James P Scheetz; Anibal M Silveira; Allan G Farman Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: O J C van Vlijmen; S J Bergé; E M Bronkhorst; G R J Swennen; C Katsaros; A M Kuijpers-Jagtman Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2009-04-14 Impact factor: 2.789
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
Authors: Manuel Pinheiro; Xinhui Ma; Michael J Fagan; Grant T McIntyre; Ping Lin; Gautham Sivamurthy; Peter A Mossey Journal: J Biol Eng Date: 2019-05-17 Impact factor: 4.355