Conventional frontal radiographs compared with frontal radiographs obtained from cone beam computed tomography

Abstract

Aim: To test the hypothesis that there is no difference between measurements performed on conventional frontal radiographs (FRs) and those performed on FRs obtained from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Materials and Methods: This study consisted of conventional FRs and CBCT-constructed FRs obtained from 30 young adult patients. Twenty-three landmarks were identified on both types of cephalometric radiographs. Twenty-one widely used cephalometric variables (14 linear distances, 4 angles, and 3 ratios) were calculated. Paired t-tests were performed to compare the means of corresponding measurements on two cephalometric radiographs of the same patient. Results: Reproducibility of measurements ranged from 0.85 to 0.99 for CBCT-constructed FRs, and from 0.78 to 0.96 for conventional FRs. A statistically significant difference was observed between conventional FRs and CBCT-constructed FRs for all linear measurements

Comparison of pharyngeal airway volume among different vertical skeletal patterns: A cone-beam computed tomography study

“…The coefficients of reliability of the pharyngeal airway volume measurements in the present study were above 0.993, agreeing with the findings of previous studies 12,13,16,25,26 using CBCT. Several two-dimensional and 3D studies 8,9,[12][13][14]16,17,[24][25][26] have been performed to evaluate the relationship between airway and sagittal skeletal patterns. It was observed that patients with skeletal Class I and III had significantly larger pharyngeal airway volumes than patients with Class II.…”

Assessment of pharyngeal airway volume in adolescent patients affected by bilateral cleft lip and palate using cone beam computed tomography

“…26 The reliability of CBCT method to assess the pharyngeal airway volume and craniofacial measurements was confirmed by several authors. 8,9,14,[26][27][28] In agreement with this finding, the ICC values were above 0.977 for all variables, thus confirming the reliability of those measurements performed on CBCT.…”

Evaluation of mandibular transverse widths in patients affected by unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate using cone beam computed tomography

“…The images were transformed to Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) format, and then software (Simplant Software, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) was used to perform the mandibular dental (intercanine and -molar), alveolar (intercanine and -molar), and skeletal (bigonial width) transversal measurements 21,22 (Figures 1-3), which were done at random by an experienced maxillofacial radiologist without knowing the group or sex of the patient. …”