Goran Markic1, Lukas Müller1, Raphael Patcas1, Malgorzata Roos2, Nina Lochbühler3, Timo Peltomäki4, Christoph A Karlo5, Oliver Ullrich6, Christian J Kellenberger3. 1. *Clinic for Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 2. **Division of Biostatistics, ISPM, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 3. ***Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University Children's Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland. 4. ****Dental and Oral Diseases Outpatient Clinic, Oral and Maxillofacial Unit, Tampere University Hospital and Department of Otolaryngology, University of Tampere, Finland. 5. ***Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University Children's Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland, *****Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. 6. ******Institute of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: To compare different imaging procedures [cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), orthopantomography (OPG), and lateral cephalometry (LC)] for assessing the mandibular height [ramus height (RH)] and condylar process (CondProc) length as they reflect mandibular growth. MATERIALS/ METHODS: The RH and CondProc of eight cadaver heads (each side separately) were measured using CBCT, CT, MRI, OPG, and LC. They were measured twice by two independent observers parallel to the posterior border of the mandibular ramus. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the inter- and intraobserver reliability. The coefficient of variation was used to elucidate precision. Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to assess the agreement between the procedures and the intra- and interobserver measurements. RESULTS: All procedures, with the exception of LC, showed good intra- and interobserver agreement (maximum range of agreement: 5.3mm) and excellent reliability (ICC > 0.9). The BA plot analysis for the CondProc and RH showed similar ranges of agreement between MRI, CT, and CBCT (maximum 6.4mm) but higher ranges for OPG and LC. The MRI and OPG values were generally smaller. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: All 3D imaging procedures yielded nearly equal results when used to measure the CondProc and RH. MRI is recommended because it avoids ionizing radiation and has higher sensitivity in the detection of inflammation. A 2-year threshold for detecting growth in the follow-up period should be taken into account for all 3D imaging methods. Measuring the RH is recommended for the follow-up of condylar growth because reference values for annual increments are published.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: To compare different imaging procedures [cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), orthopantomography (OPG), and lateral cephalometry (LC)] for assessing the mandibular height [ramus height (RH)] and condylar process (CondProc) length as they reflect mandibular growth. MATERIALS/ METHODS: The RH and CondProc of eight cadaver heads (each side separately) were measured using CBCT, CT, MRI, OPG, and LC. They were measured twice by two independent observers parallel to the posterior border of the mandibular ramus. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the inter- and intraobserver reliability. The coefficient of variation was used to elucidate precision. Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to assess the agreement between the procedures and the intra- and interobserver measurements. RESULTS: All procedures, with the exception of LC, showed good intra- and interobserver agreement (maximum range of agreement: 5.3mm) and excellent reliability (ICC > 0.9). The BA plot analysis for the CondProc and RH showed similar ranges of agreement between MRI, CT, and CBCT (maximum 6.4mm) but higher ranges for OPG and LC. The MRI and OPG values were generally smaller. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: All 3D imaging procedures yielded nearly equal results when used to measure the CondProc and RH. MRI is recommended because it avoids ionizing radiation and has higher sensitivity in the detection of inflammation. A 2-year threshold for detecting growth in the follow-up period should be taken into account for all 3D imaging methods. Measuring the RH is recommended for the follow-up of condylar growth because reference values for annual increments are published.
Authors: Alexander Juerchott; Christian Freudlsperger; Dorothea Weber; Johann M E Jende; Muhammad Abdullah Saleem; Sebastian Zingler; Christopher J Lux; Martin Bendszus; Sabine Heiland; Tim Hilgenfeld Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Elka Miller; Emilio J Inarejos Clemente; Nikolay Tzaribachev; Saurabh Guleria; Mirkamal Tolend; Arthur B Meyers; Thekla von Kalle; Jennifer Stimec; Bernd Koos; Simone Appenzeller; Linda Z Arvidsson; Eva Kirkhus; Andrea S Doria; Christian J Kellenberger; Tore A Larheim Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2018-05-08
Authors: Peter Stoustrup; Christian Kerting Iversen; Kasper Dahl Kristensen; Cory M Resnick; Carlalberta Verna; Sven Erik Nørholt; Shelly Abramowicz; Annelise Küseler; Paolo Maria Cattaneo; Troels Herlin; Thomas Klit Pedersen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alexander Heil; Eduardo Lazo Gonzalez; Tim Hilgenfeld; Philipp Kickingereder; Martin Bendszus; Sabine Heiland; Ann-Kathrin Ozga; Andreas Sommer; Christopher J Lux; Sebastian Zingler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alexander Juerchott; Muhammad Abdullah Saleem; Tim Hilgenfeld; Christian Freudlsperger; Sebastian Zingler; Christopher J Lux; Martin Bendszus; Sabine Heiland Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 4.379