Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms

Dan Grauer, Lucia S.H. Cevidanes, Martin A. Styner, Inam Heulfe, Eric T. Harmon, Hongtu Zhu, William R. Proffit

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

38 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate systematic differences in landmark position between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms and to estimate how much variability should be taken into account when both modalities are used within the same longitudinal study. Materials and Methods: Landmarks on homologous cone-beam computed tomographic- generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms of 46 patients were digitized, registered, and compared via the Hotelling T 2 test. Results: There were no systematic differences between modalities in the position of most landmarks. Three landmarks showed statistically significant differences but did not reach clinical significance. A method for error calculation while combining both modalities in the same individual is presented. Conclusion: In a longitudinal follow-up for assessment of treatment outcomes and growth of one individual, the error due to the combination of the two modalities might be larger than previously estimated. (Angle Orthod. 2010;80:286-294.)

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)286-294
Number of pages9
JournalAngle Orthodontist
Volume80
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2010

Keywords

  • Accuracy
  • CBCT
  • Cephalogram
  • Cone-beam CT
  • Error
  • Procrustes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthodontics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this