| Literature DB >> 28931867 |
Verónica García-Sanz1, Carlos Bellot-Arcís2, Virginia Hernández2, Pedro Serrano-Sánchez3, Juan Guarinos3, Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo2.
Abstract
The accuracy of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) on linear and volumetric measurements on condyles has only been assessed on dry skulls. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of linear and volumetric measurements of mandibular condyles in the presence of soft tissues using CBCT. Six embalmed cadaver heads were used. CBCT scans were taken, followed by the extraction of the condyles. The water displacement technique was used to calculate the volumes of the condyles and three linear measurements were made using a digital caliper, these measurements serving as the gold standard. Surface models of the condyles were obtained using a 3D scanner, and superimposed onto the CBCT images. Condyles were isolated on the CBCT render volume using the surface models as reference and volumes were measured. Linear measurements were made on CBCT slices. The CBCT method was found to be reliable for both volumetric and linear measurements (CV < 3%; CCI > 0.90). Highly accurate values were obtained for the three linear measurements and volume. CBCT is a reliable and accurate method for taking volumetric and linear measurements on mandibular condyles in the presence of soft tissue, and so a valid tool for clinical diagnosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28931867 PMCID: PMC5607232 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-12100-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Water displacement method to calculate physical volumes using a pycnometer.
Figure 2Anatomical landmarks and linear measurements on dry condyles.
Figure 3CBCT image orientation and slice selection for linear measurement calculations.
Figure 4Linear measurements taken on the coronal (L1 and L3) and axial (L2) views of the CBCT image.
Figure 53D scanning procedure using iTero (left) and surface model obtained (right).
Figure 6Surface model superimposed onto DICOM reconstruction in Dolphin Imaging® software.
Mean differences and SD between measurements, paired t-test (p-value) and intra/interobserver method error estimators: d Dahlberg, Coefficient of Variation (CV) and Intra-Class Coefficient (ICC) for volumetric and linear (L1, L2 and L3) measurements.
| Measurements | Error | Mean | SD | p-value | d Dahlberg | CV (%) | ICC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volume | Intra | −0.007 | 0.026 | 0.359 | 0.018 | 1.363 | 0.99 |
| Inter | −0.001 | 0.045 | 0.950 | 0.026 | 1.944 | 0.99 | |
| L1 | Intra | −0.001 | 0.019 | 0.892 | 0.013 | 0.606 | 0.99 |
| Inter | −0.008 | 0.025 | 0.276 | 0.011 | 0.536 | 0.99 | |
| L2 | Intra | 0.009 | 0.022 | 0.174 | 0.016 | 1.923 | 0.98 |
| Inter | 0.009 | 0.049 | 0.529 | 0.022 | 2.576 | 0.95 | |
| L3 | Intra | −0.003 | 0.017 | 0.559 | 0.012 | 2.070 | 0.99 |
| Inter | −0.012 | 0.044 | 0.374 | 0.008 | 1.408 | 0.95 |
Mean differences between CBCT and “Gold Standard” volumetric (cm3) and linear measurements (mm), Confidence Interval (CI) 95%, paired t-test (p-value), linear regression model results (R2 value), slope and intercept.
| Difference CBCT – Gold Standard | CI 95% | p-value | R2 | Slope [CI 95%] | Intercept [CI 95%] | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Lower Limit | Upper Limit | |||||
| Volume (cm3) | −0.010 | 0.095 | −0.071 | 0.049 | 0.711 | 0.922 | 0.911 [0.724 1.098] | 0.110 [−0.150 0.369] |
| L1 (mm) | −0.004 | 0.027 | −0.022 | 0.013 | 0.606 | 0.981 | 1.032 [0.931 1.133] | −0.072 [−0.288 0.144] |
| L2 (mm) | 0.019 | 0.084 | −0.035 | 0.072 | 0.458 | 0.702 | 0.999 [0.541 1.457] | 0.020 [−0.368 0.408] |
| L3 (mm) | 0.002 | 0.054 | −0.032 | 0.037 | 0.876 | 0.969 | 0.768 [0.631 0.906] | 0.132 [0.052 0.212] |