Reliability and accuracy of three imaging software packages used for 3D analysis of the upper airway on cone beam computed tomography images.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and accuracy of three different imaging software packages for three-dimensional analysis of the upper airway using CBCT images. METHODS To assess the reliability of the software packages, 15 NewTom 5G® (QR Systems, Verona, Italy) CBCT data sets were randomly and retrospectively selected. Two observers measured the volume, minimum cross-sectional area and the length of the upper airway using Amira® (Visage Imaging Inc., Carlsbad, CA), 3Diagnosys® (3diemme, Cantu, Italy) and OnDemand3D® (CyberMed, Seoul, Republic of Korea) software packages. The intra- and inter-observer reliability of the upper airway measurements were determined using intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland & Altman agreement tests. To assess the accuracy of the software packages, one NewTom 5G® CBCT data set was used to print a three-dimensional anthropomorphic phantom with known dimensions to be used as the "gold standard". This phantom was subsequently scanned using a NewTom 5G® scanner. Based on the CBCT data set of the phantom, one observer measured the volume, minimum cross-sectional area, and length of the upper airway using Amira®, 3Diagnosys®, and OnDemand3D®, and compared these measurements with the gold standard. RESULTS The intra- and inter-observer reliability of the measurements of the upper airway using the different software packages were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.75). There was excellent agreement between all three software packages in volume, minimum cross-sectional area and length measurements. All software packages underestimated the upper airway volume by -8.8% to -12.3%, the minimum cross-sectional area by -6.2% to -14.6%, and the length by -1.6% to -2.9%. CONCLUSIONS All three software packages offered reliable volume, minimum cross-sectional area and length measurements of the upper airway. The length measurements of the upper airway were the most accurate results in all software packages. All software packages underestimated the upper airway dimensions of the anthropomorphic phantom.

[1]  Raanan Arens,et al.  Adenotonsillectomy in obese children with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: magnetic resonance imaging findings and considerations. , 2013, Sleep.

[2]  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.

[3]  Kate Sutherland,et al.  Craniofacial Morphology in Obstructive Sleep Apnea , 2010 .

[4]  L E Bilston,et al.  Movement of the tongue during normal breathing in awake healthy humans , 2008, The Journal of physiology.

[5]  Ahmed Ghoneima,et al.  Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for airway volume analysis. , 2013, European journal of orthodontics.

[6]  Reyes Enciso,et al.  Imaging software accuracy for 3-dimensional analysis of the upper airway. , 2012, 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]  Hui Chen,et al.  Reliability of three-dimensional measurements of the upper airway on cone beam computed tomography images. , 2016, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology.

[8]  Hirpa G. Lemu,et al.  3D Printing for Rapid Manufacturing: Study of Dimensional and Geometrical Accuracy , 2011, APMS.

[9]  Antônio Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas,et al.  Reliability of upper airway linear, area, and volumetric measurements in cone-beam computed tomography. , 2014, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[10]  Christine Jacobsen,et al.  Cephalometric and three-dimensional assessment of the posterior airway space and imaging software reliability analysis before and after orthognathic surgery. , 2014, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[11]  Reinhilde Jacobs,et al.  Validation of cone beam computed tomography-based tooth printing using different three-dimensional printing technologies. , 2016, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology.

[12]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[13]  Noor Azina Ismail,et al.  Statistical Methods Used to Test for Agreement of Medical Instruments Measuring Continuous Variables in Method Comparison Studies: A Systematic Review , 2012, PloS one.

[14]  Donald L. Miller,et al.  Cancer risks associated with external radiation from diagnostic imaging procedures , 2012, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[15]  Juan Martin Palomo,et al.  Measuring the airway in 3 dimensions: a reliability and accuracy study. , 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.

[16]  M. Almeida,et al.  Reliability of a method to conduct upper airway analysis in cone-beam computed tomography. , 2013, Brazilian oral research.

[17]  S. Walter,et al.  Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  Jin-Hyoung Cho,et al.  Influence of Head Motion on the Accuracy of 3D Reconstruction with Cone-Beam CT: Landmark Identification Errors in Maxillofacial Surface Model , 2016, PloS one.

[19]  David Hatcher,et al.  Automated 3-dimensional airway analysis from cone-beam computed tomography data. , 2010, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[20]  G. Swennen,et al.  Cone-beam computerized tomography imaging and analysis of the upper airway: a systematic review of the literature. , 2011, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[21]  David S Followill,et al.  SU-E-J-210: Characterizing Tissue Equivalent Materials for the Development of a Dual MRI-CT Heterogeneous Anthropomorphic Phantom Designed Specifically for MRI Guided Radiotherapy Systems , 2015 .

[22]  Shanon Patel,et al.  Cone beam CT in dental practice , 2009, BDJ.

[23]  Jerry L Prince,et al.  Current methods in medical image segmentation. , 2000, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[24]  F. Rybicki,et al.  Medical 3D Printing for the Radiologist. , 2015, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[25]  A. Parsa,et al.  Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.