Literature DB >> 9699411

Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique.

W Geelen1, A Wenzel, E Gotfredsen, M Kruger, L G Hansson.   

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on (1) conventional films, and images acquired by storage phosphor digital radiography both on (2) hardcopy and (3) monitor-displayed versions. The material consisted of 19 cephalograms for each image modality. The phosphor plates were scanned in an image reader and the 10-bit normalized, raw data digital images were converted to 8-bit TIFF images for PC monitor-display. The digital hardcopies were produced in a laser printer. Six observers were asked to record 21 cephalometric landmarks on each conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed image. For the films and hardcopies, the landmark co-ordinates were recorded via a digitizing tablet. For the monitor-displayed images, the co-ordinates were recorded directly from the monitor using a dedicated Windows-based cephalometric program. Reproducibility was defined as an observer's deviation (in mm) from the mean between all observers. Differences between the image modalities and between the observers were tested by two-way analysis of variance for each landmark. There was a statistically significant difference between the reproducibility of film, hardcopy and monitor-displayed images in 11 of the 21 landmarks. There was no unequivocal trend that one modality was always the best. For a full cephalometric recording (the sum of all 21 landmarks), the monitor-displayed images (mean = 25.3 mm) had a lower precision than film (P < 0.005) and hard-copy (P < 0.02). There was no significant difference between film (mean = 21.8 mm) and hardcopy (mean = 22.8 mm). The lower reproducibility seen for the monitor-displayed images is most probably of little clinical significance.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9699411     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/20.3.331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  17 in total

1.  Prospective study on the reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional and digital lateral headfilms.

Authors:  K Hagemann; D Vollmer; T Niegel; U Ehmer; I Reuter
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of conventional and digital methods.

Authors:  S F Albarakati; K S Kula; A A Ghoneima
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  "Black Bone" MRI: a potential non-ionizing method for three-dimensional cephalometric analysis--a preliminary feasibility study.

Authors:  K A Eley; S R Watt-Smith; S J Golding
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  A Secondary Analysis of Panoramic Radiographs Reveals Hotspots in the Maxillofacial Region Associated with Diabetes.

Authors:  Gary D Pack; Mark Craven; Amit Acharya
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2020-05-30

5.  Comparative evaluation of cephalometric measurements of monitor-displayed images by Nemoceph software and its hard copy by manual tracing.

Authors:  Tripti Tikku; Rohit Khanna; R P Maurya; Kamna Srivastava; Rastra Bhushan
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2014-01-08

6.  Comparison between full face and hemifacial CBCT cephalograms in clinically symmetrical patients: a pilot study.

Authors:  Cintia Helena Zingaretti Junqueira; Guilherme Janson; Marisa Helena Zingaretti Junqueira; Lucas Marzullo Mendes; Eduardo Esberard Favilla; Daniela Gamba Garib
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr

7.  Quantitative evaluation of patient movement during simulated acquisition of cephalometric radiographs.

Authors:  Kyung-Hoe Huh; Erika Benavides; Young-Tak Jo; Bo-Ram Choi; Won-Jin Yi; Min-Suk Heo; Sam-Sun Lee; Soon-Chul Choi
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Coordinating bracket torque and incisor inclination : Part 2: Reproducibility and statistical measures of the torque coordination angle (TCA).

Authors:  H Sino; B Zimmer; I Schelper; S Schenk-Kazan; F Streibelt
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 1.938

9.  In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.

Authors:  Vandana Kumar; John Ludlow; Lucia Helena Soares Cevidanes; André Mol
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  An evaluation of cellular neural networks for the automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks on digital images.

Authors:  Rosalia Leonardi; Daniela Giordano; Francesco Maiorana
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2009-09-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.