Influence of different setups of the Frankfort horizontal plane on 3-dimensional cephalometric measurements

Santos, Rodrigo Mologni Gonçalves dos; Martino, José Mario De; Haiter-Neto, Francisco; Pásseri, Luís Augusto

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.12.023

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to provide clinically relevant measurements that can be decomposed in the three planes of space (i.e., anteroposterior, vertical and transversal), 3D images need to be reoriented in a generic coordinate system [21,22]. The Frankfort Horizontal (FH) plane, used for standardizing and unifying the measurements, is the most commonly used horizontal reference for this coordinate system [21,23]. Its 3D clinical value has been demonstrated for assessing craniofacial morphology and evaluating soft-tissue and skeletal cants in patients receiving orthognathic surgery [24][25][26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Its 3D clinical value has been demonstrated for assessing craniofacial morphology and evaluating soft-tissue and skeletal cants in patients receiving orthognathic surgery [24][25][26]. This plane is conventionally defined in 3D by the three following points: left orbitale (Or-L), right porion (Po-R) and left porion (Po-L) [23]. Hence, this reference plane is based on landmarks that are known to be poorly reproducible in 3D, suggesting that the conventionally defined FH plane is poorly reproducible [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmarking and Frankfort Horizontal Plane Construction: Reproducibility of Conventional and Novel Landmarks

Dot

Rafflenbeul

Kerbrat

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In some dentofacial deformity patients, especially patients undergoing surgical orthodontic treatments, Computed Tomography (CT) scans are useful to assess complex asymmetry or to plan orthognathic surgery. This assessment would be made easier for orthodontists and surgeons with a three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric analysis, which would require the localization of landmarks and the construction of reference planes. The objectives of this study were to assess manual landmarking repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) of a set of 3D landmarks and to evaluate R&R of vertical cephalometric measurements using two Frankfort Horizontal (FH) planes as references for horizontal 3D imaging reorientation. Thirty-three landmarks, divided into “conventional”, “foraminal” and “dental”, were manually located twice by three experienced operators on 20 randomly-selected CT scans of orthognathic surgery patients. R&R confidence intervals (CI) of each landmark in the -x, -y and -z directions were computed according to the ISO 5725 standard. These landmarks were then used to construct 2 FH planes: a conventional FH plane (orbitale left, porion right and left) and a newly proposed FH plane (midinternal acoustic foramen, orbitale right and left). R&R of vertical cephalometric measurements were computed using these 2 FH planes as horizontal references for CT reorientation. Landmarks showing a 95% CI of repeatability and/or reproducibility > 2 mm were found exclusively in the “conventional” landmarks group. Vertical measurements showed excellent R&R (95% CI < 1 mm) with either FH plane as horizontal reference. However, the 2 FH planes were not found to be parallel (absolute angular difference of 2.41°, SD 1.27°). Overall, “dental” and “foraminal” landmarks were more reliable than the “conventional” landmarks. Despite the poor reliability of the landmarks orbitale and porion, the construction of the conventional FH plane provided a reliable horizontal reference for 3D craniofacial CT scan reorientation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmarking and Frankfort Horizontal Plane Construction: Reproducibility of Conventional and Novel Landmarks

Dot

Rafflenbeul

Kerbrat

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…anteroposterior, vertical and transversal), 3D images need to be reoriented in a generic coordinate system (19,20). The Frankfort Horizontal (FH) plane, used for standardizing and unifying the measurements (19)(20)(21), is the most commonly used horizontal reference for this coordinate system. Its 3D clinical value has been demonstrated for assessing craniofacial morphology and evaluating soft-tissue and skeletal cants (22,23).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional cephalometric landmarking and Frankfort horizontal plane construction: reproducibility of conventional and novel landmarks

Dot

Rafflenbeul

Kerbrat

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess manual landmarking repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) of a set of three-dimensional (3D) landmarks and to evaluate R&R of vertical cephalometric measurements using two Frankfort Horizontal (FH) planes as references for horizontal 3D imaging reorientation.MethodsThirty-three landmarks, divided into “conventional”, “foraminal” and “dental”, were manually located twice by 3 experienced operators on 20 computed tomography (CT) scans of orthognathic surgery patients. R&R of the landmark localization were computed according to the ISO 5725 standard. These landmarks were then used to construct 2 FH planes: a conventional FH plane (orbitale left, porion right and left) and a newly proposed FH plane (midinternal acoustic foramen, orbitale right and left). R&R of vertical cephalometric measurements were computed using these 2 FH planes as horizontal references for CT reorientation.ResultsLandmarks showing a 95% confidence interval (CI) of repeatability and/or reproducibility > 2mm were found exclusively in the “conventional” landmarks group. Vertical measurements showed excellent R&R (95% CI < 1mm) with either FH plane as horizontal reference. However, the 2 FH planes were not found to be parallel (absolute angular difference of 2.41°, SD 1.27°). The average time needed to landmark one CT scan was 14 ± 3 minutes.ConclusionsThe “dental” and “foraminal” landmarks tended to be more reliable than the “conventional” landmarks. Despite the poor overall reliability of the landmarks orbitale and porion, the construction of the conventional FH plane using 3 landmarks provided a reliable horizontal reference for 3D craniofacial CT scan reorientation.

show abstract

“…FH plane (also called the auriculo-orbital plane) was first introduced by Von Ihering in 1872 but slightly modified and correctly established at the World Congress of Anthropology, in Frankfort, Germany in 1882. [45] The FH plane is now defined as the plane would pass through the upper borders of each ear canal or external auditory meatus (Porion/Po) and through the inferior border of the orbital rim (Orbitale/Or). Before the anthropology met, this plane was defined so as to pass through the center of the external auditory meatus to the lowest point of the inferior margin of each orbit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Before the anthropology met, this plane was defined so as to pass through the center of the external auditory meatus to the lowest point of the inferior margin of each orbit. [4]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cephalometric evaluation of sexual dimorphism of the angle sella-nasion-frankfort horizontal plane in different sagittal classes of malocclusion in south Indian population

Reddy

Singaraju

Mandava

et al. 2019

J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and Objectives: The present study aims to evaluate the gender dimorphism of the angle SN-FH between the sella-nasion (SN) plane and the Frankfort horizontal (FH) plane among the three types of skeletal malocclusion in South Indian population. The objectives included measurement of angle SN-FH, FH to the nasion (NFH), FH to the sella (SFH), and the difference of NFH and SFH (Δ). The null hypothesis was that there exists no variation of the angle SN-FH, NFH, SFH, and Δ between males and females and in the different skeletal relationship of jaws. Materials and Methods: Cephalometric data were retrieved from the archived records of 180 patients, comprising 90 males and 90 females, within three subgroups. Class I (60), Class II (20), and Class III (10) in each of the gender class were examined. Student's “ t ” test was used to analyze means of the gender differences and analysis of variance between subgroups, and significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: The average values obtained from this study for the overall population are 8.06 ± 3.34; for males, it is 7.42 ± 3.62, and for females, it is 8.7 ± 3.48. The gender difference is statistically significant only in Class I malocclusion (0.002). There is no statistical difference between different skeletal classes of malocclusion. Conclusion: The null hypothesis is partially rejected for as significant difference is established only for some of the parameters under the study.

show abstract

Influence of different setups of the Frankfort horizontal plane on 3-dimensional cephalometric measurements

Cited by 12 publications

References 21 publications

Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmarking and Frankfort Horizontal Plane Construction: Reproducibility of Conventional and Novel Landmarks

Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmarking and Frankfort Horizontal Plane Construction: Reproducibility of Conventional and Novel Landmarks

Three-dimensional cephalometric landmarking and Frankfort horizontal plane construction: reproducibility of conventional and novel landmarks

A cephalometric evaluation of sexual dimorphism of the angle sella-nasion-frankfort horizontal plane in different sagittal classes of malocclusion in south Indian population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About