Accuracy of anatomical landmark identification using different CBCT- and MSCT-based 3D images : An in vitro study;DVT- und MSCT-gestützter Vergleich der Reproduzierbarkeit anatomischer Messpunkte : Eine In-vitro-Studie

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 261-278

  Medelnik, Jürgen ^a   Hertrich, Klaus ^a   Steinhäuser Andresen, Stefanie ^a   Hirschfelder, Ursula ^a   Hofmann, Elisabeth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ERLANGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT); Human cadaver head; Landmark identification; Multislice computed tomography (MSCT)

Indexed keywords

ANATOMIC LANDMARK; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; INSTRUMENTATION; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; REFERENCE VALUE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ANATOMIC LANDMARKS; CEPHALOMETRY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SPIRAL CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 80155137246     PISSN: 14345293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00056-011-0032-5     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baumrind S, Frantz RC (1971) The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod 60:111-127
2. Brown AA, Scarfe WC, Scheetz JP et al (2009) Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived images. Angle Orthod 79:150-157
3. Cavalcanti MGP, Rocha SS, Vannier MW (2004) Craniofacial measurements based on 3D-CT volume rendering: implications for clinical applications. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:170-176
4. Chien PC, Parks ET, Eraso F et al (2009) Comparison of reliability in anatomic landmark identification using two-dimensional digital chephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38:262-273
5. Coppenrath E, Draenert F, Lechel U et al (2008) Schnittbildverfahren zur dentomaxillofacialen Diagnostik: Dosisvergleich von Dental-MSCT und New Tom 9000 CBCT. Fortschr Rontgenstr 180:396-401 (Pubitemid 351985348)
6. Damstra J, Fourie Z, Huddleston Slater JJ et al (2010) Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomography-derived surface models of different voxel sizes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137(1):16.e1-16.e6; discussion 16-17
7. De Oliveira AE, Cevidanes LH, Phillips C et al (2009) Observer reliability of threedimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107:256- 265
8. Eggers G, Klein J, Welzel T et al (2008) Geometric accuracy of digital volume tomography and conventional computed tomography. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 46:639-644
9. Greiner M, Greiner A, Hirschfelder U (2007) Variance of landmarks in digital evaluations: Comparison between CT-based and conventional digital lateral cephalometric radiographs. J Orofac Orthop 68:290-298 (Pubitemid 47103877)
10. Hofmann E, Medelnik J, Fink M et al (2011) Three-dimensional volume tomographic study of the imaging accuracy of impacted teeth: MSCT and DVT comparison - an in vitro study. Eur J Orthod doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr030
11. Hofmann E, Medelnik J, Keller T et al (2011) Measuring mesiodistal width of impacted maxillary canines. J Orofac Orthod; doi: 10.1007/s00056-010-0005-0
12. Holberg C, Steinhäuser S, Geis P et al (2005) Cone-beam computed tomography in orthodontics: benefits and limitations. J Orofac Orthop 66:434-444
13. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y et al (2004) Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19:228-231 (Pubitemid 38561060)
14. Kyriakou Y, Kolditz D, Lagner O et al (2010) Digital volume tomography (DVT) and multislice spiral CT (MSCT): an objective examination of dose and image quality. Fortschr Rontgenstr doi: http://www.dx.doi.org/10.1055/ s-0029-1245709
15. Kusnoto B, Evans CA, BeGole EA et al (1999) Assessment of 3-dimensional computer generated cephalometric measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 116:390-399
16. Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM (2004) Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-New Tom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:291-294 (Pubitemid 40288455)
17. Liang X, Lambrichts I, Sun Y et al (2010) A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT). Part II: On 3D model accuracy. Eur J Radiol 75:270-274
18. Loubele M, Guerrero ME, Jacobs R et al (2007) A comparison of jaw dimensional and quality assessments of bone characteristics with cone-beam CT, spiral tomography, and multi-slice spiral CT. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22:446-454
19. Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck et al (2009) Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol 71:461-468
20. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL et al (2006) Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CBMercury, NewTom 3G and i-Cat. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:219-226 (Pubitemid 44076876)
21. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M (2008) Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 106:930-938
22. Marmulla R, Wörtche R, Mühling J et al (2005) Geometric accuracy of the New- Tom 9000 cone-beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 34:28-31 (Pubitemid 40352815)
23. Martin R (1914) Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Gustav Fischer, Jena
24. Mischkowski RA, Pulsfort R, Ritter L et al (2007) Geometric accuracy of a newly developed cone-beam device for maxillofacial imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 104:551-559
25. Okano T, Harata Y, Sugihara Y et al (2009) Absorbed and effective doses from cone beam volumetric imaging for implant planning. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38:79-85
26. Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B et al (2010) Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol, epub ahead of pring
27. Periago D, Scarfe W, Moshiri M et al (2008) Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program. Angle Orthod 78:387-395
28. Ritter L, Dreiseidler T (2007) Bildqualität - Anforderungen und Einflussfaktoren. In: Zöller JE (Hrsg) Digitale Volumentomographie in der Zahn-, Mund- und Kieferheilkunde. Grundlagen, Diagnostik und Behandlungsplanung. Quintessenz, Berlin, Chicago, Tokio, Barcelona, Istanbul, London, Mailand, Moskau, Neu-Delhi, Paris, Peking, Prag, Sao Paulo, Seoul, Warschau, S 23-25
29. Silva MAG, Wolf U, Heinicke F et al (2008) Cone-beam computed tomography for routine orthodontic treatment planning: a radiation dose evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 133:1-5
30. Strateman SA, Huang JC, Maki K et al (2008) Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:80-93
31. Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M et al (2008) Accuracy of linear measurements using cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:10-17 (Pubitemid 351211971)
32. Swennen G, Schutyser F (2006) Three-dimensional cephalometry: spiral multislice vs. cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 130:410-416 (Pubitemid 44376705)
33. Titiz I, Laubinger M, Keller T et al (2011) Precision of landmarks - a CT study. Eur J Orthod (accepted for publication)
34. Tsiklakis K, Donta C, Gavala S et al (2005) Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam CT. Eur J Radiol 56:413-417 (Pubitemid 41659395)
35. Valentin J (2007) The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:1-332
36. Ward RE, Jamison PL (1991) Measurement precision and reliability in craniofacial anthropometry: implications and suggestions for clinical applications. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol 11:156-164