Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography cephalometric measurements using a midsagittal projection and conventional two-dimensional cephalometric measurements.
10.4041/kjod.2015.45.6.282
- Author:
Pil Kyo JUNG
1
;
Gung Chol LEE
;
Cheol Hyun MOON
Author Information
1. Department of Orthodontics, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea. orthodm@gilhospital.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cephalometrics;
Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT);
Diagnosis and treatment planning;
Reorientation
- MeSH:
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography*;
Humans;
Radiography
- From:The Korean Journal of Orthodontics
2015;45(6):282-288
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether it is possible to use a two-dimensional (2D) standard in three-dimensional (3D) analysis, by comparing the angles and lengths measured from a midsagittal projection in 3D cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with those measured by 2D lateral cephalometric radiography (LCR). METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent both LCR and CBCT were selected as subjects. CBCT was reoriented in 3 different methods and the measuring-points were projected onto the midsagittal plane. Twelve angle values and 8 length values were measured on both LCR and CBCT and compared. RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of the variance revealed statistically significant differences in 7 angular and 5 linear measurements among LCR and 3 types of CBCT (p < 0.05). Of these 12 measurements, multiple comparisons showed that 6 measurements (ANB, AB to FH, IMPA, FMA, Co-Gn, Go-Me) were not significantly different in pairwise comparisons. LCR was significantly different from 3 types of CBCT in 3 angular (SN to FH, interincisal angle, FMIA) and 2 linear (S-Go, Co-ANS) measurements. The CBCT method was similar for all measurements, except for 1 linear measurement, i.e., S-N. However, the disparity between the mean values for all parameters was within the range of clinical measurement error. CONCLUSIONS: 3D-CBCT analysis, using midsagittal projection, is a useful method in which the 2D-LCR normative values can be used. Although the measurements changed with reorientation, these changes were not clinically significant.