Michael Boelstoft Holte1,2, Henrik Sæderup1, Else Marie Pinholt1,2. 1. 3D Lab Denmark, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark. 2. Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to validate and compare the accuracy and reliability of surface- and voxel-based registration on the mandibular rami for long-term three-dimensional (3D) evaluation of condylar remodelling following Orthognathic Surgery. METHODS: The mandible was 3D reconstructed from a pair of superimposed pre- and postoperative (two years) cone-beam computerized tomography scans and divided into the condyle, and 21 ramal regions. The accuracy of surface- and voxel-based registration was measured by the absolute mean surface distance of each region after alignment of the pre- and postoperative rami. To evaluate the reliability, mean absolute differences and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated at a 95% confidence interval on volumetric and surface distance measurements of two observers. Paired t-tests were applied to statistically evaluate whether the accuracy and reliability of surface- and voxel-based registration were significantly different (p < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of twenty subjects (sixteen female; four male; mean age 27.6 years) with class II malocclusion and maxillomandibular retrognathia, who underwent bimaxillary surgery, were included. Surface-based registration was more accurate and reliable than voxel-based registration on the mandibular ramus two years post-surgery (p < 0.05). The interobserver reliability of using surface-based registration was excellent, ICC range [0.82-1.00]. For voxel-based registration, the interobserver reliability ranged from poor to excellent [0.00-0.98]. The measurement error introduced by applying surface-based registration for assessment of condylar remodelling was considered clinical irrelevant (1.83% and 0.18 mm), while the measurement error introduced by voxel-based registration was considered clinical relevant (5.44% and 0.52 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Surface-based registration was proven more accurate and reliable compared to voxel-based registration on the mandibular ramus for long-term 3D assessment of condylar remodelling following Orthognathic Surgery. However, importantly, the performance difference may be caused by an inappropriate reference structure, proposed in the literature, and applied in this study.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to validate and compare the accuracy and reliability of surface- and voxel-based registration on the mandibular rami for long-term three-dimensional (3D) evaluation of condylar remodelling following Orthognathic Surgery. METHODS: The mandible was 3D reconstructed from a pair of superimposed pre- and postoperative (two years) cone-beam computerized tomography scans and divided into the condyle, and 21 ramal regions. The accuracy of surface- and voxel-based registration was measured by the absolute mean surface distance of each region after alignment of the pre- and postoperative rami. To evaluate the reliability, mean absolute differences and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated at a 95% confidence interval on volumetric and surface distance measurements of two observers. Paired t-tests were applied to statistically evaluate whether the accuracy and reliability of surface- and voxel-based registration were significantly different (p < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of twenty subjects (sixteen female; four male; mean age 27.6 years) with class II malocclusion and maxillomandibular retrognathia, who underwent bimaxillary surgery, were included. Surface-based registration was more accurate and reliable than voxel-based registration on the mandibular ramus two years post-surgery (p < 0.05). The interobserver reliability of using surface-based registration was excellent, ICC range [0.82-1.00]. For voxel-based registration, the interobserver reliability ranged from poor to excellent [0.00-0.98]. The measurement error introduced by applying surface-based registration for assessment of condylar remodelling was considered clinical irrelevant (1.83% and 0.18 mm), while the measurement error introduced by voxel-based registration was considered clinical relevant (5.44% and 0.52 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Surface-based registration was proven more accurate and reliable compared to voxel-based registration on the mandibular ramus for long-term 3D assessment of condylar remodelling following Orthognathic Surgery. However, importantly, the performance difference may be caused by an inappropriate reference structure, proposed in the literature, and applied in this study.
Authors: Neslisah Torosdagli; Denise K Liberton; Payal Verma; Murat Sincan; Janice S Lee; Ulas Bagci Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2018-10-12 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Pieter-Jan Verhelst; Andreas Smolders; Thomas Beznik; Jeroen Meewis; Arne Vandemeulebroucke; Eman Shaheen; Adriaan Van Gerven; Holger Willems; Constantinus Politis; Reinhilde Jacobs Journal: J Dent Date: 2021-08-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Rania M Nada; Thomas J J Maal; K Hero Breuning; Stefaan J Bergé; Yehya A Mostafa; Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 3.240