Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: Accuracy of Three-dimensional Cephalometry Analysis and Influence of Patient Scanning Position

Abstract The aim of this research was to analyze the influence of the position of the skull during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan and if the three-dimensional cephalometric measurements are influenced by skull orientation during CBCT scan. The study consisted of 5 CBCT scanning (KODAK 9500 Cone Beam 3D System unit) in 5 different positions of a dry skull. The data were imported in SIMPLANT OMS Software version 13.0. Fifteen three-dimensional cephalometric measurements were calculated; moreover, the mean, the SD, the maximum/minimum &Dgr;, and the maximum/minimum &Dgr; percentage were calculated. The statistical analysis was performed by an independent-samples t-test to evaluate differences between the 5 scans. No difference was found in all the three-dimensional analysis. Twelve of 15 measurements have a &Dgr; greater than 1.5, and 7 of 15 measurements have a &Dgr; greater than 2. Nine of 15 have a &Dgr; percentage greater than 5%. The preliminary results suggest that the three-dimensional cephalometric analysis is influenced by patient scanning position.

[1]  L. Will,et al.  Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull. , 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.

[2]  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.

[3]  Allan G Farman,et al.  Accuracy of linear temporomandibular joint measurements with cone beam computed tomography and digital cephalometric radiography. , 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.

[4]  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.

[5]  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.

[6]  G. Swennen,et al.  Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. , 2009, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[7]  B. Holly Broadbent,et al.  A NEW X-RAY TECHNIQUE and ITS APPLICATION TO ORTHODONTIA , 2009 .

[8]  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.

[9]  C. Lascala,et al.  Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). , 2004, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[10]  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.

[11]  P. Mozzo,et al.  A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results , 1998, European Radiology.

[12]  S Baumrind,et al.  The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. , 1971, American journal of orthodontics.

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

[14]  Sheldon Baumrind,et al.  The reliability of head film measurements , 1971 .

[15]  W R Proffit,et al.  Superimposition of 3D cone-beam CT models of orthognathic surgery patients. , 2005, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[16]  John B Ludlow,et al.  Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy in cone beam computed tomography images. , 2007, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[17]  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.

[18]  James A McNamara,et al.  Accuracy and reliability of craniometric measurements on lateral cephalometry and 3D measurements on CBCT scans. , 2011, The Angle orthodontist.

[19]  David C Hatcher,et al.  Cone beam CT for pre-surgical assessment of implant sites. , 2003, Journal of the California Dental Association.

[20]  J Martin Palomo,et al.  Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements. , 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.

[21]  André Mol,et al.  In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. , 2008, The Angle orthodontist.

[22]  William R Proffit,et al.  Image analysis and superimposition of 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography models. , 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.

[23]  D. Tyndall,et al.  Head orientation in CBCT-generated cephalograms. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[24]  Danielle R. Periago,et al.  Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program. , 2008, The Angle orthodontist.

[25]  David P Sarment,et al.  Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[26]  Birdsall Holly Sr Broadbent,et al.  Bolton standards of dentofacial developmental growth , 1975 .

[27]  P. Bracco,et al.  Assessment of the Reliability and Repeatability of Landmarks Using 3-D Cephalometric Software , 2012, Cranio : the journal of craniomandibular practice.

[28]  S Baumrind,et al.  The reliability of head film measurements. 2. Conventional angular and linear measures. , 1971, American journal of orthodontics.

[29]  H M Pinsky,et al.  Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. , 2006, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[30]  John B Ludlow,et al.  Precision of cephalometric landmark identification: cone-beam computed tomography vs conventional cephalometric views. , 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.

[31]  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.

[32]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Proposed reference point for 3-dimensional cephalometric analysis with cone-beam computerized tomography. , 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.

[33]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Reliability of traditional cephalometric landmarks as seen in three-dimensional analysis in maxillary expansion treatments. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[34]  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.