Sources of error in measurements from cephalometric radiographs

Houston, W. J. B.; Maher, Rehana; McElroy, Donald G.; Sherriff, Martyn

doi:10.1093/ejo/8.3.149

Cited by 162 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The difference in measurements between the two methods could be due to the fact that certain hard tissue landmarks such as articulare, gonion, porion, menton, gnathion, orbitale and point 'A' lie on poorly defined outlines or low contrast areas, and also some of the soft tissue landmarks such as Li, Ls, Me', Pog' and Sn are present on the contoured area, making them difficult to locate on radiographs in manual technique. These are substantiated by the findings of Houston et al, 15 Gregston et al, 20 Santaro et al 17 and Ozsoy et al, 12 who also found difficulties in locating landmarks Ar, Gn, Go, Po, Or, lower incisor apex, Me, Pog, and point A. During manual tracing different reference planes were constructed to assist in identifying points Gn, Me and Go, which was not possible with on-screen digitization, where these points were marked by the operator with a single click of the mouse without any reference plane construction.…”

Section: à16supporting

confidence: 62%

Comparative evaluation of cephalometric measurements of monitor-displayed images by Nemoceph software and its hard copy by manual tracing

Tikku

Khanna

Maurya

et al. 2014

Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjective: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the cephalometric measurements obtained from computerized tracing of direct digital radiographs and hand tracing of their digital radiographic printouts. Material and methods: The soft-and hard-copies of pre-treatment lateral cephalograms of 40 subjects (both males and females) within the age group of 10e30 years, irrespective of the type of malocclusion were taken. Total 26 measurements (13 linear and 13 angular) were obtained using both the manual and the digital technique. for angular measurements). While amongst the angular measurements, only occlusal plane angle showed statistically significant difference between the two techniques that was not clinically acceptable.

show abstract

Section: à16supporting

confidence: 62%

Comparative evaluation of cephalometric measurements of monitor-displayed images by Nemoceph software and its hard copy by manual tracing

Tikku

Khanna

Maurya

et al. 2014

Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The major sources of error in cephalometric analysis include radiographic film magnification, tracing, measuring, recording, and landmark identification [17,18] and thus one of the efforts to improve the precision in landmark identification should be directed towards improvement in the image quality [19] Digital radiography could revolutionize both clinical and research practices in craniofacial cephalometrics as occurred with the introduction of computer programs, digitizers, and plotters in the 1970s. The potential advantages of digital technology lie in the ability to (1) manipulate the image, (2) reduce radiation dose, and (3) improve storage and access of information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Establishment of Soft Tissue Norms for the North Indian Population Based on Laymen Perception

Gupta¹,

Garg²,

Anand

et al. 2012

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study we aimed to determine the soft tissue norms for the North Indian population based on the laymen perception of facial esthetics and to test the hypothesis that there are racial differences in cephalometric measurement between North Indians and White Americans norms. Two sets (Facial frontal and profile photographs) of 170 standardized facial photographs (76 males and 94 females in the age group of 18-28 years) were taken. A panel of judges which consisted of 20 laymen evaluated the photographs on the visual analogue scale to select a sample of 120 subjects (60 males and 60 females), which included individuals with esthetically pleasing appearance. Digital lateral cephalograms were made and anatomic landmarks were identified directly on the digital images. Seventeen soft tissue variables taken from Subtenley's, Holdaway's, Ricketts and Legan's analysis were calculated electronically using the Dolphin (version 9) software package. Most measurements were similar to the white American norms, some differences were noticed in nasal prominence, basic upper lip thickness, and 'H' angle measurements. The independent-sample t test was used to compare the measurement differences of the North Indian men and women. North Indian males have relatively prominent and thicker upper lip, and increased basic upper lip thickness than the females. Lower lip was found to be more protrusive in females than in males.

show abstract

“…Other authors believe that a difference of 2 mm is considered acceptable and does not have any influence in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment plan 17,20 Reliability of S landmark identification was relatively low, presenting a deviation of -0.22 mm in the x direction and of 0.28 mm in the y direction. Some cephalometric landmarks are more reliable in either the horizontal or vertical plane 21 . We had previously revealed a low variability of the S landmark.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sella landmark variability and its effect on the Angles SNA and SNB: a comparative study

Durão

Morosolli

Dias

et al. 2016

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To determine intra-and inter-observer precision in Sella (S), Nasion (N), point A and B identification. Additionally, to determine how it can interfere with angular measurements of SNA and SNB by orthodontists and dentomaxillofacial radiologists. MethodsTwenty digital lateral cephalometric radiographs were evaluated by five orthodontists and five dentomaxillofacial radiologists. Results Differences in linear and RESUMO ObjetivoDeterminar a precisão intra e inter-observador na identificação dos pontos Sella (S), Násio (N), A e B. Também, verificar como a identificação dos pontos pode interferir nas medições angulares de SNA e SNB por ortodontistas e radiologistas odontológicos. MétodosVinte telerradiografias laterais digitais foram avaliadas por cinco ortodontistas e cinco radiologistas odontológicos. Diferenças de medidas lineares e angulares foram avaliadas. ResultadosConcordância intra e inter-observador foi avaliada e a reprodutibilidade intra e inter-observador dos componentes horizontais e verticais da identificação S marco (ICC: 0,75 / 0,90). Ortodontistas tenderam a produzir maior valor para SNA (-0.18º), enquanto que para o ângulo SNB houve tendência a dimininuição do valor (0.55º). Em geral, os valores obtidos para o ângulo SNA foram menores (radiologistas: -0.308º e ortodontistas: -0.092º) e SNB apresentados com valores maiores (radiologistas: -0.074º: 0.078º e ortodontistas). Concordância intra e inter-observador foi avaliada e a reprodutibilidade intra e inter-observador dos componentes horizontais e verticais da identificação S marco (ICC: 0,75 / 0,90). Ortodontistas tenderam a produzir maior valor para SNA (-0.18º), enquanto que para o ângulo SNB houve tendência a dimininuição do valor (0.55º). Em geral, os valores obtidos para o ângulo SNA foram menores (radiologistas: -0.308º e ortodontistas: -0.092º) e SNB apresentados com valores maiores (radiologistas: -0.074º: 0.078º e ortodontistas). ConclusãoA identificação do ponto Sella revelou uma melhor concordância entre os radiologistas odontológicos. Ortodontistas, no entanto, mostraram uma maior variabilidade na identificação do ponto S e, consequentemente, os ângulos SNA e SNB variaram significativamente. A identificação do ponto Sella revelou uma melhor concordância entre os radiologistas odontológicos. Ortodontistas, no entanto, mostraram uma maior variabilidade na identificação do ponto S e, consequentemente, os ângulos SNA e SNB variaram significativamente.Termos de indexação: Circunferência craniana. Estudo comparativo. Ortodontia. 264RGO, Rev Gaúch Odontol, Porto Alegre, v.64, n.3, p. 263-270, jul./set., 2016 AR DURÃO et al.

show abstract

Sources of error in measurements from cephalometric radiographs

Cited by 162 publications

References 0 publications

Comparative evaluation of cephalometric measurements of monitor-displayed images by Nemoceph software and its hard copy by manual tracing

Comparative evaluation of cephalometric measurements of monitor-displayed images by Nemoceph software and its hard copy by manual tracing

Establishment of Soft Tissue Norms for the North Indian Population Based on Laymen Perception

Sella landmark variability and its effect on the Angles SNA and SNB: a comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About