Statistical shape analysis-based determination of optimal midsagittal reference plane for evaluation of facial asymmetry

Shin, Sang Min; Kim, You-Min; Kim, Nari; Choi, Yong-Seok; Park, Soo‐Byung; Kim, Yong‐Il

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.01.017

Cited by 30 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In previously reported studies, the estimation of the symmetry plane was accomplished through the identification of multiple anatomical landmarks. Landmarks that were then mirrored about an arbitrary plane and matched using Procrustes superimposition [23–25]. Here, a global solution for the definition of the symmetry plane is proposed, simply by taking advantage of the 3D skull data and the properties of both PCA and ICP methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 3D cephalometric protocol for the accurate quantification of the craniofacial symmetry and facial growth

Pinheiro

Fagan

et al. 2019

J Biol Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cephalometric analysis is used to evaluate facial growth, to study the anatomical relationships within the face. Cephalometric assessment is based on 2D radiographic images, either the sagittal or coronal planes and is an inherently inaccurate methodology. The wide availability of 3D imaging techniques, such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging make routine 3D analysis of facial morphology feasible. 3D cephalometry may not only provide a more accurate quantification of the craniofacial morphology and longitudinal growth, but also the differentiation of subtle changes in occlusion. However, a reliable protocol for the computation of craniofacial symmetry and quantification of craniofacial morphology is still a topic of extensive research. Here, a protocol for 3D cephalometric analysis for both the identification of the natural head position (NHP) and the accurate quantification of facial growth and facial asymmetry is proposed and evaluated. A phantom study was conducted to assess the performance of the protocol and to quantify the ability to repeatedly and reliably align skulls with the NHP and quantify the degree of accuracy with which facial growth and facial asymmetry can be measured. Results The results obtained show that the protocol allows consistent alignment with the NHP, with an overall average error (and standard deviation) of just 0.17 (9.10e-6) mm, with variations of 0.21 (2.77e-17) mm in the frontonasal suture and 0.30 (5.55e-17) mm in the most prominent point in the chin. The average errors associated with simulated facial growth ranged from 1.83 to 3.75% for 2 years’ growth and from − 9.57 to 14.69% for 4 years, while the error in the quantification of facial asymmetry ranged from − 11.38 to 9.31%. Conclusions The protocol for 3D skull alignment produces accurate and landmark free estimation of the true symmetry of the head. It allows a reliable alignment of the skull in the NHP independently of user-defined landmarks, as well as an accurate quantification of facial growth and asymmetry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 3D cephalometric protocol for the accurate quantification of the craniofacial symmetry and facial growth

Pinheiro

Fagan

et al. 2019

J Biol Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous in vivo studies have already demonstrated that 2D cephalometric analysis can be performed on MRI: In comparison between MRI and lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCR), no clinically relevant discrepancies were observed for 2D analyses including midsagittal 16 , 30 as well as bilateral 16 landmarks. Therefore, lateral 2D measurements defined by a 3-landmark-based midsagittal plane (MSP) 31 were integrated in the analysis protocol of the present study. This approach revealed a high reliability in repeated 2D measurements with average ranges between minimum and maximum values of 1.17° and 1.08 mm, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D cephalometric analysis using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: validation of accuracy and reproducibility

Juerchott

Saleem

Hilgenfeld

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to validate geometric accuracy and in vivo reproducibility of landmark-based cephalometric measurements using high-resolution 3D Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at 3 Tesla. For accuracy validation, 96 angular and 96 linear measurements were taken on a phantom in 3 different positions. In vivo MRI scans were performed on 3 volunteers in five head positions. For each in vivo scan, 27 landmarks were determined from which 19 angles and 26 distances were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using Bland-Altman analysis, the two one-sided tests procedure and repeated measures one-way analysis of variance. In comparison to ground truth, all MRI-based phantom measurements showed statistical equivalence (p < 0.001) and an excellent agreement in Bland-Altman analysis (bias ranges: −0.090–0.044°, −0.220–0.241 mm). In vivo cephalometric analysis was highly reproducible among the five different head positions in all study participants, without statistical differences for all angles and distances (p > 0.05). Ranges between maximum and minimum in vivo values were consistently smaller than 2° and 2 mm, respectively (average ranges: 0.88°/0.87 mm). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that accurate and reproducible 3D cephalometric analysis can be performed without exposure to ionizing radiation using MRI.

show abstract

“…The Cranio Symmetry Axis (CSA) in the coordiante System abb. 15 The determination of CranioSphere, foramen magnum in horizontal CBCT-layer abb. 16 The outer CranioSphere-Point located in 3D-CBCT view…”

Section: Abb 14mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…He chose the N-ANS-PNS combination. 15 As the Anterior Nasal Spine point is not located close to the neurocranium and even if it can be traumatically injured by a fracture, 21,22 this definition of the midsagittal plane is not exact enough and quite vulnerable considering the fact, that nasal fracture is one of the most common types of facial fractures. 23 Thiesen suggested to use additional cranial based landmarks.…”

Section: D-cephalometric Analysis Fachlichmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The common three 3D-determinations for the midsagittal plane are cephalometric analysis, morphometric measurements and voxel-based 2D-Analysis. 14, 15 The cephalometric analysis transfers the 2D experience into the 3D world. They are easy to handle and even can be taken from the combination of lateral and anterior-posterior 2D X-ray.…”

Section: D-cephalometric Analysis Fachlichmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

3D-Cephalometric Analysis based on afferent sense

Polzar¹,

Hornung²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Statistical shape analysis-based determination of optimal midsagittal reference plane for evaluation of facial asymmetry

Cited by 30 publications

References 20 publications

A 3D cephalometric protocol for the accurate quantification of the craniofacial symmetry and facial growth

A 3D cephalometric protocol for the accurate quantification of the craniofacial symmetry and facial growth

3D cephalometric analysis using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: validation of accuracy and reproducibility

3D-Cephalometric Analysis based on afferent sense

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About