Gabriele Di Carlo1,2, Sirwan Fernandez Gurani3, Else Marie Pinholt3, Paolo Maria Cattaneo2. 1. 1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Science, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 2. 2 Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Science, Section of Orthodontics, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 3. 3 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hospital of South West Jutland, Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a new reproducible 3D upper airway analysis based on skeletal structures not involved in the modification, which occur during orthognathic surgery. METHODS: From retrospective cohort of orthognathic surgically treated patients, pre- and postsurgical CBCT-scans of 10 post-pubertal patients were randomly selected. Two operators identified the landmarks, calculated the airway volumes, cross sections and linear measurements on the 10 scans twice at two different time intervals. Statistical analysis included test for normal distribution, technical error measurements, and intra- and inter-observers reliability. RESULTS: Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent for volumes and cross sections. The entire data sets exhibited normal distribution. Technical error of measurements showed an error in the range of 1.6 to 10.2% for volume, 1.6 to 12.2% for cross-sectional measurements, and 0.3 to 2.5% for linear measurements. No systematic errors were detected. CONCLUSIONS: This new proposed definition of upper airway boundaries was shown to be technical feasible and tested to be reliable in measuring upper airway in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery.
OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a new reproducible 3D upper airway analysis based on skeletal structures not involved in the modification, which occur during orthognathic surgery. METHODS: From retrospective cohort of orthognathic surgically treated patients, pre- and postsurgical CBCT-scans of 10 post-pubertal patients were randomly selected. Two operators identified the landmarks, calculated the airway volumes, cross sections and linear measurements on the 10 scans twice at two different time intervals. Statistical analysis included test for normal distribution, technical error measurements, and intra- and inter-observers reliability. RESULTS: Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent for volumes and cross sections. The entire data sets exhibited normal distribution. Technical error of measurements showed an error in the range of 1.6 to 10.2% for volume, 1.6 to 12.2% for cross-sectional measurements, and 0.3 to 2.5% for linear measurements. No systematic errors were detected. CONCLUSIONS: This new proposed definition of upper airway boundaries was shown to be technical feasible and tested to be reliable in measuring upper airway in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery.
Authors: T Muto; A Yamazaki; S Takeda; J Kawakami; Y Tsuji; T Shibata; I Mizoguchi Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2005-06-14 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Laura Fernández-Ferrer; José María Montiel-Company; Teresa Pinho; José Manuel Almerich-Silla; Carlos Bellot-Arcís Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2014-11-28 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Alexandru Diaconu; Michael Boelstoft Holte; Paolo Maria Cattaneo; Else Marie Pinholt Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2021-11-08 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Franco Marinozzi; Francesco Carleo; Simone Novelli; Marco Di Martino; Giuseppe Cardillo; Lea Petrella; Fabiano Bini Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2020-06-12
Authors: Giovanni Badiali; Ottavia Lunari; Mirko Bevini; Barbara Bortolani; Laura Cercenelli; Manuela Lorenzetti; Emanuela Marcelli; Alberto Bianchi; Claudio Marchetti Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2021-03-04
Authors: Ying Ji Chuang; Seong Jae Hwang; Kevin A Buhr; Courtney A Miller; Gregory D Avey; Brad H Story; Houri K Vorperian Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 3.240