OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of three-dimensional (3D) landmark identification in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using two different visualization techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve CBCT images were randomly selected. Three observers independently repeated three times the identification of 30 landmarks using 3D reconstructions and 28 landmarks using multiplanar views. The values of the coordinates X, Y, and Z of each point were obtained and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. RESULTS: The ICC of the 3D visualization was rated >0.90 in 67.76% and 45.56%, and ≤0.45 in 13.33% and 14.46% of the intraobserver and interobserver assessments, respectively. The ICC of the multiplanar visualization was rated >0.90 in 82.16% and 78.56% and ≤0.45 in only 16.7% and 8.33% of the intraobserver and interobserver assessments, respectively. An individual landmark classification was done according to ICC values. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of highly reliable values was greater for multiplanar than 3D reconstructions. Overall, lower reliability was found for points on the condyle and higher reliability for those on the midsagittal plane. Depending on the anatomic region, the observer must choose the most reliable type of image visualization.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of three-dimensional (3D) landmark identification in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using two different visualization techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve CBCT images were randomly selected. Three observers independently repeated three times the identification of 30 landmarks using 3D reconstructions and 28 landmarks using multiplanar views. The values of the coordinates X, Y, and Z of each point were obtained and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. RESULTS: The ICC of the 3D visualization was rated >0.90 in 67.76% and 45.56%, and ≤0.45 in 13.33% and 14.46% of the intraobserver and interobserver assessments, respectively. The ICC of the multiplanar visualization was rated >0.90 in 82.16% and 78.56% and ≤0.45 in only 16.7% and 8.33% of the intraobserver and interobserver assessments, respectively. An individual landmark classification was done according to ICC values. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of highly reliable values was greater for multiplanar than 3D reconstructions. Overall, lower reliability was found for points on the condyle and higher reliability for those on the midsagittal plane. Depending on the anatomic region, the observer must choose the most reliable type of image visualization.