Reliability and the smallest detectable difference of measurements on 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography images.

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and the measurement error (by means of the smallest detectable error) of 17 commonly used cephalometric measurements made on 3-dimensional (3D) cone-beam computed tomography images. METHODS Twenty-five cone-beam computed tomography scans were randomly selected, and 3D images were rendered, segmented, and traced with the SimPlant Ortho Pro software (version 2.1, Materialise Dental, Leuven, Belgium). This was repeated twice by 2 observers during 2 sessions at least 1 week apart. Measurement error was determined by means of the smallest detectable difference. Differences were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability values were calculated by means of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) based on absolute agreement. RESULTS There were great variations of measurement errors between the angular (range, 0.88°-6.29°) and linear (range, 1.33-3.56 mm) variables. The greatest measuring error was associated with the dental measurements U1-FHPL, L1-MdPL. and L1-FHPL (range, 3.80°-6.29°). ANB angle was the only variable with a measuring error of 1° or less for both observers. The intraobserver agreement of all measurements was very good (ICC, 0.86-0.99). Except for SN-FHPL (ICC, 0.76), interobserver agreement was very good (ICC, >0.88). CONCLUSIONS The measurement errors of 3D cephalometric measurements (except for the ANB angle) can be considered clinically relevant. This questions the use of linear and angular 3D measurements to detect true treatment effects when a high level of accuracy is required.

[1]  W G Hopkins,et al.  Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science , 2000, Sports medicine.

[2]  R. Verbeeck,et al.  The clinical significance of error measurement in the interpretation of treatment results. , 2001, European journal of orthodontics.

[3]  Maritzabel Gubler,et al.  PRECISION OF CEPHALOMETRIC LANDMARK IDENTIFICATION , 2008 .

[4]  Seiji Haraguchi,et al.  Facial asymmetry in subjects with skeletal Class III deformity. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[5]  M. M. van der Krogt,et al.  Reproducibility and validity of video screen measurements of gait in children with spastic cerebral palsy. , 2010, Gait & posture.

[6]  William R Proffit,et al.  Working with DICOM craniofacial images. , 2009, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[7]  Guy Marchal,et al.  Assessment of bone segmentation quality of cone-beam CT versus multislice spiral CT: a pilot study. , 2006, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[8]  A Richardson,et al.  A comparison of traditional and computerized methods of cephalometric analysis. , 1981, European journal of orthodontics.

[9]  Erwin Keeve,et al.  Geometric accuracy of a newly developed cone-beam device for maxillofacial imaging. , 2007, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[10]  Paul W Major,et al.  Accuracy of measurements and reliability of landmark identification with computed tomography (CT) techniques in the maxillofacial area: a systematic review. , 2007, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[11]  M. Maas,et al.  Reliability of in vivo determination of forearm muscle volume using 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  Y. Lagerros.  Physical activity—the more we measure, the more we know how to measure , 2009, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[13]  Frederik Gelaude,et al.  Accuracy and repeatability of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements used in the determination of facial indices in the laboratory setup. , 2009, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[14]  D. Hatcher,et al.  Radiation absorbed in maxillofacial imaging with a new dental computed tomography device. , 2003, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[15]  David C Hatcher,et al.  Diagnosis goes digital. , 2004, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[16]  P W Major,et al.  Sensitivity analysis for plane orientation in three-dimensional cephalometric analysis based on superimposition of serial cone beam computed tomography images. , 2010, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[17]  Allan G Farman,et al.  Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3D images. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[18]  Richard N Smith,et al.  Accounting for measurement error: a critical but often overlooked process. , 2009, Archives of oral biology.

[19]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-dimensional treatment planning of orthognathic surgery in the era of virtual imaging. , 2009, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[20]  P. Dijkstra,et al.  Smallest Detectable Difference in Outcome Variables Related to Painful Restriction of the Temporomandibular Joint , 1999, Journal of dental research.

[21]  Heleen Beckerman,et al.  Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness , 2001, Quality of Life Research.

[22]  P. Wesselink,et al.  Comparison of five cone beam computed tomography systems for the detection of vertical root fractures. , 2010, Journal of endodontics.

[23]  M. Styner,et al.  Three-Dimensional Superimposition for Quantification of Treatment Outcomes , 2010 .

[24]  Janalt Damstra,et al.  Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomography-derived surface models of different voxel sizes. , 2010, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[25]  Demetrios J Halazonetis,et al.  From 2-dimensional cephalograms to 3-dimensional computed tomography scans. , 2005, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[26]  Yijin Ren,et al.  Reliability and the smallest detectable differences of lateral cephalometric measurements EDITOR'S COMMENT , 2010 .

[27]  Bassam Hassan,et al.  Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements obtained from cone beam computed tomography surface-rendered images for cephalometric analysis: influence of patient scanning position. , 2009, European journal of orthodontics.

[28]  Om P Kharbanda,et al.  Comparison of radiation levels from computed tomography and conventional dental radiographs , 2003, Australian orthodontic journal.

[29]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-dimensional cephalometry: spiral multi-slice vs cone-beam computed tomography. , 2006, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[30]  Mauricio Reyes,et al.  Three-dimensional surgical simulation. , 2010, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[31]  Brandon Burke,et al.  Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography. , 2009, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[32]  R Jacobs,et al.  Image quality vs radiation dose of four cone beam computed tomography scanners. , 2008, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[33]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  A New Method of 3-D Cephalometry Part I: The Anatomic Cartesian 3-D Reference System , 2006, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[34]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images. , 2008, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[35]  B Macq,et al.  Three-dimensional computed tomography cephalometric craniofacial analysis: experimental validation in vitro. , 2007, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[36]  M Kortesniemi,et al.  Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. , 2008, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[37]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-Dimensional Cephalometry , 2006 .

[38]  E M Bronkhorst,et al.  A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls. , 2010, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[39]  Filip Schutyser,et al.  Three-dimensional cephalometry : a color atlas and manual , 2006 .

[40]  S. Nagasaka,et al.  Development of a non-radiographic cephalometric system. , 2003, European journal of orthodontics.