Literature DB >> 32637188

Quantitative Comparison of Cephalogram and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Alveolar Bone Thickness of Maxillary Incisors.

Diyang Wei1, Lingyun Zhang1, Weiran Li1, Yilin Jia1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantitatively compare cephalogram and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) when evaluating maxillary central incisor alveolar bone thickness.
METHODS: We used 30 sets of lateral cephalograms and CBCT images that were recorded at the same time. Labial, buccal, and overall alveolar bone thicknesses were measured on three measurement lines of the forward-most incisor in lateral cephalograms and four maxillary incisors in CBCT images. Paired t-test, interclass correlation coefficient analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Bland-Altman analysis were used to assess cephalometrically measured alveolar bone thickness of maxillary incisors and compare these measurements with those made using CBCT images.
RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between cephalometric and CBCT-based measurements of maxillary incisor alveolar bone thickness; most values showed mild or moderate correlation between the two methods. In most cases, cephalometric measurements were greater than CBCT-based measurements. Bland-Altman plots and ANOVA revealed that measurement bias increased when measurement lines moved apically. Alveolar bone thickness was always overestimated on cephalograms.
CONCLUSION: Maxillary incisor alveolar bone thickness is always overestimated on cephalograms compared with CBCT-based measurements, with the overestimations ranging from 0.3 to 1.3 mm. Cephalometric measurement bias increases when measurement lines move apically. Thus, CBCT should be recommended when the accurate evaluation of alveolar bone thickness is warranted. © Copyright 2020 by Turkish Orthodontic Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alveolar bone thickness; cephalogram; cone-beam computed tomography; maxillary incisor; orthodontic diagnosis

Year:  2020        PMID: 32637188      PMCID: PMC7316481          DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Turk J Orthod        ISSN: 2148-9505


  25 in total

1.  Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images.

Authors:  Manuel O Lagravère; Jason Carey; Roger W Toogood; Paul W Major
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull.

Authors:  Mauricio Berco; Paul H Rigali; R Matthew Miner; Stephelynn DeLuca; Nina K Anderson; Leslie A Will
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Three-dimensional interpretation of labiolingual bone width of the lower incisors. Part II.

Authors:  R Fuhrmann
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.938

4.  Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable.

Authors:  J Lee; D Koh; C N Ong
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.589

5.  Factors affecting buccal bone changes of maxillary posterior teeth after rapid maxillary expansion.

Authors:  Kitichai Rungcharassaeng; Joseph M Caruso; Joseph Y K Kan; Jay Kim; Guy Taylor
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.650

6.  Comparison of reliability in anatomical landmark identification using two-dimensional digital cephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo.

Authors:  P C Chien; E T Parks; F Eraso; J K Hartsfield; W E Roberts; S Ofner
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.419

7.  Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography.

Authors:  Ana Emilia F de Oliveira; Lucia Helena S Cevidanes; Ceib Phillips; Alexandre Motta; Brandon Burke; Donald Tyndall
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2008-08-20

8.  Changes of anterior maxillary alveolar bone thickness following incisor proclination and extrusion.

Authors:  Udom Thongudomporn; Chairat Charoemratrote; Sarayut Jearapongpakorn
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Assessment of buccal bone thickness of aesthetic maxillary region: a cone-beam computed tomography study.

Authors:  Ramón Fuentes; Tania Flores; Pablo Navarro; Carlos Salamanca; Víctor Beltrán; Eduardo Borie
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 2.614

10.  Factors related to alveolar bone thickness during upper incisor retraction.

Authors:  Nuengrutai Yodthong; Chairat Charoemratrote; Chidchanok Leethanakul
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 2.079

View more
  3 in total

1.  Measuring the Facial Plate of Bone in the Upper Anterior Teeth Utilizing Cone Beam Computed Tomography at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Badr Othman; Talal Zahid; Hanadi Khalifa; Abdulmajeed Afandi; Nawaf A Alshehri; Ahmed Sait; Sultan Abdoun
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-09-22

2.  Assessment of Maxillary Incisors' Angulation and Position in Different Types of Malocclusions Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Noor Falah Kadhim Al-Khawaja; Mohammed Nahidh; Resha Jameel Abdulsaheb
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2021-12-21

3.  Three-Dimensional Analysis of Posterior Mandibular Displacement in Rats.

Authors:  Ioannis Lyros; Efstratios Ferdianakis; Demetrios Halazonetis; Theodoros Lykogeorgos; Antigoni Alexiou; Konstantina-Eleni Alexiou; Maria Georgaki; Emmanouil Vardas; Zafeiroula Yfanti; Apostolos I Tsolakis
Journal:  Vet Sci       Date:  2022-03-20
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.