A comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurements

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridNalçacı, Ruhi/0000-0002-3273-7870
dc.authorwosidNalçacı, Ruhi/X-4516-2019
dc.contributor.authorNalcaci, R.
dc.contributor.authorOzturk, F.
dc.contributor.authorSokucu, O.
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-04T20:32:16Z
dc.date.available2024-08-04T20:32:16Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The objective of this study was to assess the reliability of three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric approaches by comparing this method with authenticated traditional two-dimensional (2D) cephalometry in angular cephalometric measurements. Methods: CT images and lateral cephalometric radiographs of ten patients (five women, five men) were used in this study. Raw CT data of the patients were converted to 3D images with a 3D simulation program (Mimics 9.0, Leuven, Belgium). Lateral cephalometric radiographs were used manually for 2D measurements. The comparisons of the two methods were made using 14 cephalometric angular measurements. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test (alpha = 0.05) was used to determine the difference between the two methods. To assess the intra-and interobserver reproducibility, two sets of recordings made by each observer, in each modality were used. Dahlberg's formula was used to determine the intraobserver reproducibility, and the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test (alpha = 0.05) was used to assess the interobserver reproducibility. Results: The method errors of both observers ranged from 0.35 degrees to 0.65 degrees. In addition, there were no significant differences between the measurements of the two observers (P > 0.05). However, comparison of 2D and 3D parameters showed significant differences in U1-NA and U1-SN measurements (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The 3D angular cephalometric analysis is a fairly reliable method, like the traditional 2D cephalometric analysis. Currently, the 3D system is likely to be more suitable for the diagnosis of cases with complex orthodontic anomalies. However, with the decrease in radiation exposure and costs in the future, 3D cephalometrics can be a suitable alternative method to 2D cephalometry. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2010) 39, 100-106. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/82724776en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1259/dmfr/82724776
dc.identifier.endpage106en_US
dc.identifier.issn0250-832X
dc.identifier.issn1476-542X
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid20100922en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-75949094768en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage100en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/82724776
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/94967
dc.identifier.volume39en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000275503900007en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBritish Inst Radiologyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofDentomaxillofacial Radiologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectcephalometric measurementsen_US
dc.subjectcomputed tomographyen_US
dc.subjectthree-dimensional cephalometryen_US
dc.titleA comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurementsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu