Effect of Head Position on Linear Cephalometric Measurement Accuracy of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 38 No. 1 (2020),
22 February 2021
,
Page 7-13
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v38i1.33740
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to assess the effect of head position on linear cephalometric measurements by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Methods: CBCT scans of four human dry skulls were obtained by NewTom 3G volume scanner with alarge (15 x15 cm)field of view in 1 centric and 18 eccentric positions: 10°, 20°, and 30° tilt (right and left), 10°, 20°, and 30° rotation (right and left), 10°, 20°, and 30° extension and 10°, 20°,and 30° flexion. The distances between the selected landmarks namely the Nasion (N), Sella (Se), anterior nasal spine (AN S), Menton (Me), Gnathion (Gn), Gonion (Go), and Condylion (Co) were measured by two observers on maximum intensity projection reconstructions using the NNT Viewer software, and compared with the actual measurements (gold standard). The inter-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and the student’s t-test were used for statistical analysis.
Results The mean inter-rater agreement was excellent for all head positions (ICC=96.89%). The maximum error in absolute mean measurements was 2.56 mm (P=0.03) The minimum error was for the N-Me line, which is a vertical line closest to the midline.
Conclusion The greatest error was observed in 30° left ward rotation for the left CoGn linear measurement. Although this level of error may not be of clinical significance, it is suggested that clinicians acquire the scans in ideal head position to minimize distortion and errors.
- Cephalometry
- Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
- Patient positioning
How to Cite
References
Nikneshan S, Aval SH, Bakhshalian N, Shahab S, Mohammadpour M, Sarikhani S. Accuracy of linear measurement using cone-beam computed tomography at different reconstruction angles. Imaging Sci Dent 2014;44:257-62.
Lindfors N, Lund H, Johansson H, Ekestubbe A. Influence of patient position and other inherent factors on image quality in two different cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices. Eur J Radiol Open. 2017;4:132-7.
Adibi S, Shahidi SH, Nikanjam S, Paknahad M, Ranjbar MA. Influence of patient position on the CBCT Accuracy in assessment of the proximity of the root apices to inferior alveolar canal. J Dent (Shiraz). 2017;18(3):181-6.
Cevidanes L, Oliveira A, Motta A, Phillips C, Burke BR, Tyndall D. Head orientation in CBCT-generated cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(5):971-7.
Sabban H, Mahdian M, Dhingra A, Lurie AG, Tadinada A. Evaluation of linear measurements of implant sites based on head orientation during acquisition: An ex vivo study using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45(2):73-80.
Koivisto J, Eijnatten MV, Järnstedt J, Holli-Helenius K, Dastidar P, Wolff J. Impact of prone, supine and oblique patient positioning on CBCT image quality, contrast-to-noise ratio and figure of merit value in the maxillofacial region. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46(6):20160418.
Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Abolvardi M, Akhlaghian M, Paknahad M. Comparison of dental panoramic radiography and CBCT for measuring vertical bone height in different horizontal locations of posterior mandibular alveolar process. J Dent (Shiraz). 2018;19(2):83-91.
Shokri A, Miresmaeili A, Farhadian N, Falah-kooshki S, Amini P, Mollaie N. Effect of changing the head position on accuracy of transverse measurements of the maxillofacial region made on cone beam computed tomography and conventional posterior-anterior cephalograms. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46(5): 20160180.
El-Beialy AR, Fayed MS, El-Bialy AM, Mostafa YA. Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography measurements: Influence of head orientation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140(2):157-65.
Panjnoush M, Kheirandish Y, Zeini N. Effect of spatial position in the field of view on dimensional changes in cone beam computed tomography. Front Dent2017;14(5):282.
Hwang JJ, Park H, Jeong HG, Han SS. Change in image quality according to the 3D locations of a CBCT phantom. PLoS One. 2016;11(4):e0153884.
Park CS, Park JK, Kim H, Han SS, Jeong HG, Park H. Comparison of conventional lateral cephalograms with corresponding CBCT radiographs. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(4):201-5.
Kitai N, Murabayashi M, Sugimoto H, Fujiwara A, Tome W, Katsumata A. Accuracy and head positioning effects on measurements of anterior tooth length using 3-dimensional and conventional dental panoramic radiography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017 Mar;151(3):607-15.
White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology. principles and interpretation. Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2014.41-63.
Durão AP, Morosolli A, Pittayapat P, Bolstad N, Ferreira AP, Jacobs R. Cephalometric landmark variability among orthodontists and dentomaxillofacial radiologists: a comparative study. Imaging Sci Dent 2015;45(4):213-20.
Visconti MA, Verner FS, Assis NM, Devito KL. Influence of maxillomandibular positioning in cone beam computed tomography for implant planning. J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2013;42(7):880-6.
Stamatakis HC, Steegman R, Dusseldorp J, Ren Y. Head positioning in a cone beam computed tomography unit and the effect on accuracy of the three-dimensional surface mode. Eur J Oral Sci. 2019 ;127(1): 72-80.
- Abstract Viewed: 255 times
- PDF Downloaded: 63 times