Literature DB >> 21978416

Asymmetry assessment using cone beam CT. A Class I and Class II patient comparison.

Matthew M Sievers1, Brent E Larson, Philippe R Gaillard, Andrew Wey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate possible differences in skeletal asymmetry between patients with skeletal Class I and skeletal Class II relationships.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were examined from 70 consecutive patients who presented for orthodontic care and fit the inclusion criteria. Asymmetry was quantified using an asymmetry index developed by Katsumata et al. Anatomic landmarks were defined and reference planes were established to determine the asymmetry of the landmarks using a constructed coordinate plane system. Thirty randomly selected patients were reanalyzed to assess the reliability of the method.
RESULTS: Statistical analysis did not find any significant relationship between asymmetry and A-P skeletal relationship for any of the landmarks. Asymmetry index scores were reproducible within a certain range of agreement for each landmark.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the discrepant jaw growth resulting in a Class II skeletal pattern results in no more skeletal asymmetry than Class I skeletal patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21978416      PMCID: PMC8865812          DOI: 10.2319/041711-271.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  25 in total

1.  Comparison of the reliability of craniofacial anatomic landmarks based on cephalometric radiographs and three-dimensional CT scans.

Authors:  J Kragskov; C Bosch; C Gyldensted; S Sindet-Pedersen
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  1997-03

2.  Accuracy of linear temporomandibular joint measurements with cone beam computed tomography and digital cephalometric radiography.

Authors:  Michael L Hilgers; William C Scarfe; James P Scheetz; Allan G Farman
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Class II subdivision malocclusion types and evaluation of their asymmetries.

Authors:  Guilherme Janson; Karina Jerônimo Rodrigues Santiago de Lima; Donald G Woodside; Angelos Metaxas; Marcos Roberto de Freitas; José Fernando Castanha Henriques
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy in cone beam computed tomography images.

Authors:  John B Ludlow; William Stewart Laster; Meit See; L'Tanya J Bailey; H Garland Hershey
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2006-08-04

5.  Cephalometric roentgenology; history, technics and uses.

Authors:  A G BRODIE
Journal:  J Oral Surg (Chic)       Date:  1949-07

6.  Averageness or symmetry: which is more important for facial attractiveness?

Authors:  Masashi Komori; Satoru Kawamura; Shigekazu Ishihara
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2009-04-25

7.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Asymmetry of the cranio-facial skeleton.

Authors:  J T Cook
Journal:  Br J Orthod       Date:  1980-01

9.  A 3-dimensional method for analyzing the morphology of patients with maxillofacial deformities.

Authors:  Masahiko Terajima; Akihiko Nakasima; Yoshimitsu Aoki; Tazuko K Goto; Kenji Tokumori; Noriko Mori; Yoshihiro Hoshino
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.650

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

Authors:  John B Ludlow; Maritzabel Gubler; Lucia Cevidanes; André Mol
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.650

View more
  7 in total

1.  Craniofacial features affecting mandibular asymmetries in skeletal Class II patients.

Authors:  Guilherme Thiesen; B F Gribel; M P M Freitas; D R Oliver; K B Kim
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Comparison between full face and hemifacial CBCT cephalograms in clinically symmetrical patients: a pilot study.

Authors:  Cintia Helena Zingaretti Junqueira; Guilherme Janson; Marisa Helena Zingaretti Junqueira; Lucas Marzullo Mendes; Eduardo Esberard Favilla; Daniela Gamba Garib
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr

3.  Impact of different malocclusion types on the vertical mandibular asymmetry in young adult sample.

Authors:  Amjad Al Taki; Mohammed H Ahmed; Hussain A Ghani; Fatma Al Kaddah
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep

4.  The use of three-dimensional cephalometric references in dentoskeletal symmetry diagnosis.

Authors:  Olavo Cesar Lyra Porto; Jairo Curado de Freitas; Ana Helena Gonçalves de Alencar; Carlos Estrela
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2014-12-01

5.  The genial tubercle: A prospective novel landmark for the diagnosis of mandibular asymmetry.

Authors:  Seung-Youp Lee; Dong-Soon Choi; Insan Jang; Geun-Su Song; Bong-Kuen Cha
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 1.372

6.  Quantification of skeletal asymmetries in normal adolescents: cone-beam computed tomography analysis.

Authors:  Derek A Sanders; Taranpreet K Chandhoke; Flavio A Uribe; Paul H Rigali; Ravindra Nanda
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.750

7.  Comparison of maxillomandibular asymmetries in adult patients presenting different sagittal jaw relationships.

Authors:  Guilherme Thiesen; Maria Perpétua Mota Freitas; Bruno Frazão Gribel; Ki Beom Kim
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2019-09-05
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.