A comparative study of digital lateral radiography and virtual cone-beam computed assisted cephalogram in cephalometric measurements

Calle-Morocho, Jesica; Morales-Vadillo, Rafael; Guevara-Canale, Janet; Alva-Cuneo, Carlos

doi:10.17126/joralres.2018.076

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Out of 14 variables assessed, Calle-Morocho et al (2018) only found significant differences in measurements taken for SNA, SNB, SND, ISNA, SL and SE when comparing between CSLCs and digital lateral cephalograms. The authors highlighted the following as plausible reasons for these differences: difficulty in locating point A and the apex of a tooth; difficulty in distinguishing between central and lateral incisors; and difficulty identifying points on a curved surface.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…In support of this hypothesis, Aksoy et al (2016) found three linear measurements (Co-Gn, ANS-Me, Wits appraisal) to be less reliable with CSLCs. Calle-Morocho et al (2018) similarly noted a statistically significant difference in SL distance that was justified by the difficulty in locating the Pg point. da Silva et al (2013) found a significant difference in angular measurements GoGn.SN and IMPA ( P < 0.05).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…There was variation in the definition of clinical significance reported in the current literature. The majority of the studies reasonably defined the level of clinical significance to be within the range of 2°/mm (Calle-Morocho et al, 2018; Cavalcanti et al, 1999; Chen et al, 2014; van Bunningen et al, 2021). However, several studies had stricter criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A systematic review

Raj

Saigo

2023

J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-synthesised lateral cephalograms (CSLCs) compared with conventional lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis in human participants and skull models. Methods: The authors performed a search of PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and Embase databases on 4 October 2021. Included studies met the following criteria: published in English; compared conventional lateral cephalograms and CSLCs; assessed hard- and soft-tissue landmarks; and were performed on human or skull models. Data extraction from eligible studies was performed by two independent reviewers. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist tool – diagnostic accuracy studies. Results: A total of 20 eligible articles were included in this systematic review. Of these 20 studies, 17 presented with a low risk of bias, while three were found to have a moderate risk of bias. Hard- and soft-tissue analyses were evaluated for each imaging modality. The findings reveal that CSLCs are accurate and comparable to conventional lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis and demonstrate good inter-observer reliability. Four studies reported a higher accuracy with CSLCs. Conclusion: Overall, the diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of CSLCs were comparable to conventional lateral cephalograms in cephalometric analysis. It is justified that patients who have an existing CBCT scan do not need an additional lateral cephalogram, minimising unnecessary radiation exposure, expenses and time for the patient. Larger voxel sizes and low-dose CBCT protocols can be considered to minimise radiation exposure. Registration: This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021282019).

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A systematic review

Raj

Saigo

2023

J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study showed that images created from a CBCT are more accurate than lateral skull radiographs in terms of linear measurement analysis, so the deferred results argue for a high level of reliability when generalizing cephalometric measurements in digital images from a CBCT. (5) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Steiner Cephalometric analysis of lateral skull X-ray images with CBCT in a group of students of the dental school of the University of Cuenca

Olalla¹,

Parra²,

Cárdenas³

et al. 2023

World J. Adv. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Steiner analysis from images obtained from cone beam computed tomography is one of the essential tools today for diagnosis in the area of orthodontics, within this aspect its high value for the study of points, angles and cephalometric planes allows the prediction of the possible treatment plan for each patient according to the specific characteristics resulting in each patient. Objective: To compare the results in Steiner cephalometric measurements obtained in 2D lateral skull radiographs and in 3D cephalograms generated from Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Methodology: Type of comparative analytical study. A non-probabilistic sample was established by convenience consisting of 29 diagnostic studies divided into: 29 lateral skull X-rays and 29 standardized CBCT. Subsequent localization, tracing and measurement of skeletal and dental angles were performed according to Steiner's cephalometric analysis using Nemostudio 2022 software. The study and analysis was performed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. Results: The mean difference between the skeletal angles SNA, SNB, ANB, SND and Occlusal Plane Angle showed that there is no significant discrepancy when performing a cephalometric analysis in three-dimensional images compared to two-dimensional images. Conclusion: There is a high degree of reliability and accuracy of cephalometric measurements for obtaining skeletal and dental angles in two-dimensional images obtained from a CBCT with respect to a lateral radiograph.

show abstract

“…Recientemente, Calle-Morocho y col. 15 realizaron un estudio para determinar las discrepancias en las mediciones cefalométricas entre dos tipos de imagen digital (radiografía cefalométrica lateral digital y el cefalograma virtual por Tomografía Computarizada (TC) de Haz Cónico) en 40 pacientes, con la utilización de Nemoceph para los dos tipos de imagen, evaluando la validez y reproducibilidad mediante la comparación por parte del investigador principal del análisis cefalométrico de Steiner, obteniendo diferencias mininas entre el primer y segundo análisis. Eso puede explicarse debido a las ventajas y herramientas con las que cuentan tanto la imagen digital como el trazado cefalométrico digital, los que proporcionan excelente reproducibilidad, tiempo ahorrado (evitando el trazado manual) y eficiencia.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Comparación entre trazados cefalométricos manual y digital en radiografías laterales del cráneo

Calle-Velezmoro

Calle-Morocho²,

Morales-Vadillo

et al. 2021

Revista Argentina de Radiología / Argentinian Journal of Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumen Objetivo Evaluar la diferencia del trazado cefalométrico manual con el digital en radiografías laterales de cráneo. Materiales y métodos Inicialmente se realizó un piloto para calibrar al investigador principal, en donde se analizaron 10 radiografías pertenecientes a cinco pacientes del Servicio de Radiología del Centro Odontológico de nuestra institución para evaluar la concordancia entre los dos evaluadores y establecer el tamaño de la muestra. Finalmente, se analizaron 78 radiografías cefalométricas de 39 pacientes, en las que se realizó el trazado cefalométrico de Steiner manual y digital. Esas radiografías se analizaron en una escala 1:1 y posteriormente se evaluó la diferencia de las mediciones mediante el análisis univariado, se determinó en mediana e intervalo intercuartil por separado. En el análisis bivariado, se aplicó la prueba de signo de rangos de Wilcoxon y muestras pareadas para determinar la diferencia de las mediciones cefalométricas de Steiner entre el tipo del análisis cefalométrico. El nivel de significancia se fijó en p < 0,05 y confiabilidad al 95%, respectivamente. Resultados No hubo diferencia significativa en la mayoría de las mediciones hechas de manera manual y digital, siendo el ángulo interincisal la única medición angular en la cual hubo diferencia significativa al obtener un resultado de p = 0,002. Mientras tanto, en las mediciones lineales, la única medición en la que hubo diferencia significativa fue en el segmento incisivo inferior – NB con p = 0,005. Conclusión No se encuentran diferencias significativas entre el trazado cefalométrico manual y el digital. No obstante, es importante tener en cuenta que la muestra o población evaluada es reducida para definir conclusiones.

show abstract

A comparative study of digital lateral radiography and virtual cone-beam computed assisted cephalogram in cephalometric measurements

Abstract: A comparative study of digital lateral radiography and virtual cone-beam computed assisted cephalogram in cephalometric measurements.

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A systematic review

Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A systematic review

Comparison of Steiner Cephalometric analysis of lateral skull X-ray images with CBCT in a group of students of the dental school of the University of Cuenca

Comparación entre trazados cefalométricos manual y digital en radiografías laterales del cráneo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About