Advertisement

Cone beam computed tomography-based cephalometric norms for Brazilian adults

  • R.M.G. Santos
    Affiliations
    Department of Computer Engineering and Industrial Automation, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil
    Search for articles by this author
  • J.M. De Martino
    Correspondence
    Address: José Mario De Martino, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Engenharia Elétrica e de Computação, Av. Albert Einstein, 400, Cidade Universitária “Zeferino Vaz”, Barão Geraldo, CEP 13083-852, Campinas, SP, Brazil. Tel.: +55 19 3521 3794, Fax: +55 19 3521 3845.
    Affiliations
    Department of Computer Engineering and Industrial Automation, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil
    Search for articles by this author
  • F. Haiter Neto
    Affiliations
    Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil
    Search for articles by this author
  • L.A. Passeri
    Affiliations
    Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil
    Search for articles by this author
Published:August 10, 2017DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2017.06.030

      Abstract

      This study established cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based cephalometric norms for Brazilian adults, including the assessment of sexual dimorphism. An observer performed McNamara’s cephalometric analysis twice on 60 CBCT datasets acquired from patients with a normal dental occlusion, divided equally into two groups by sex. Welch’s t-test was applied to assess differences between the sexes in hard tissue cephalometric measurements, and Dahlberg’s formula was used to calculate measurement error introduced by the observer. The cephalometric measurements of effective mandibular length, effective midfacial length, maxillomandibular differential, and lower anterior facial height presented sexual dimorphism. Linear measurements had error ≤0.78 mm, and angular measurements had error ≤1.24°. The results show that (1) the CBCT-based cephalometric norms established in this study are reliable for use by researchers and clinicians, and (2) Brazilian adult males and females have similar craniofacial morphology, with males possessing larger jaws than females.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Broadbent B.H.
        A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontia.
        Angle Orthod. 1931; 1: 45-66https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(1931)001<0045:ANXTAI>2.0.CO;2
        • Mozzo P.
        • Procacci C.
        • Tacconi A.
        • Martini P.T.
        • Andreis I.A.B.
        A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results.
        Eur Radiol. 1998; 8: 1558-1564https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300050586
        • Kapila S.D.
        Contemporary concepts of cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics.
        in: Kapila S.D. Cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics: indications, insights, and innovations. John Wiley & Sons, Danvers2014: 5-42
        • Damstra J.
        • Slater J.J.R.H.
        • Fourie Z.
        • Ren Y.
        Reliability and the smallest detectable differences of lateral cephalometric measurements.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010; 138 (e1–546. e8): 546https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.05.013
        • Gribel B.F.
        • Gribel M.N.
        • Frazão D.C.
        • McNamara Jr, J.A.
        • Manzi F.R.
        Accuracy and reliability of craniometric measurements on lateral cephalometry and 3D measurements on CBCT scans.
        Angle Orthod. 2011; 81: 26-35https://doi.org/10.2319/032210-166.1
        • Berco M.
        • Rigali P.H.
        • Miner R.M.
        • DeLuca S.
        • Anderson N.K.
        • Will L.A.
        Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2009; 136 (e1–17. e9): 17https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.021
        • Kamburoğlu K.
        • Kolsuz E.
        • Kurt H.
        • Kılıç C.
        • Özen T.
        • Paksoy C.S.
        Accuracy of CBCT measurements of a human skull.
        J Digit Imaging. 2011; 24: 787-793https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-010-9339-9
        • Swennen G.R.
        • Schutyser F.
        • Hausamen J.E.
        Three-dimensional cephalometry: a color atlas and manual.
        Springer, New York2006
        • Kumar V.
        • Ludlow J.B.
        • Mol A.
        • Cevidanes L.
        Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007; 36: 263-269https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/98032356
        • van Vlijmen O.J.C.
        • Maal T.
        • Bergé S.J.
        • Bronkhorst E.M.
        • Katsaros C.
        • Kuijpers-Jagtman A.M.
        A comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional cephalometry on frontal radiographs and on cone beam computed tomography scans of human skulls.
        Eur J Oral Sci. 2009; 117: 300-305https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2009.00633.x
        • van Vlijmen O.J.C.
        • Maal T.
        • Bergé S.J.
        • Bronkhorst E.M.
        • Katsaros C.
        • Kuijpers-Jagtman A.M.
        A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 39: 156-160https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2009.11.017
        • Garib D.G.
        • Calil L.R.
        • Leal C.R.
        • Janson G.
        Is there a consensus for CBCT use in orthodontics?.
        Dent Press J Orthod. 2014; 19: 136-149https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.19.5.136-149.sar
        • Cheung L.K.
        • Chan Y.M.
        • Jayaratne Y.S.N.
        • Lo J.
        Three-dimensional cephalometric norms of Chinese adults in Hong Kong with balanced facial profile.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011; 112: e56-e73https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.02.045
        • Wong R.W.
        • Chau A.C.
        • Hägg U.
        3D CBCT McNamaraäs cephalometric analysis in an adult southern Chinese population.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 40: 920-925https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2011.03.011
        • Liang C.
        • Liu S.
        • Liu Q.
        • Zhang B.
        • Li Z.
        Norms of McNamara’s cephalometric analysis on lateral view of 3D CT imaging in adults from Northeast China.
        J Hard Tissue Biol. 2014; 23: 249-254https://doi.org/10.2485/jhtb.23.249
        • Devanna R.
        Two-dimensional to three-dimensional: a new three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography cephalometric analysis.
        J Orthod Res. 2015; 3: 30-37https://doi.org/10.4103/2321-3825.146356
        • Bayome M.
        • Park J.H.
        • Kook Y.A.
        New three-dimensional cephalometric analyses among adults with a skeletal class I pattern and normal occlusion.
        Korean J Orthod. 2013; 43: 62-73https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2013.43.2.62
        • Vahdettin L.
        • Aksoy S.
        • Öz U.
        • Orhan K.
        Three-dimensional cephalometric norms of Turkish Cypriots using CBCT images reconstructed from a volumetric rendering program in vivo.
        Turk J Med Sci. 2016; 46: 841-861https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1409-21
        • McNamara Jr., J.A.
        A method of cephalometric evaluation.
        Am J Orthod. 1984; 86: 449-469https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(84)90352-X
        • Harris E.F.
        • Smith R.N.
        Accounting for measurement error: a critical but often overlooked process.
        Arch Oral Biol. 2009; 54: S107-S117https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2008.04.010
        • Lorensen W.E.
        • Cline H.E.
        Marching cubes: a high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm.
        Comp Graph (ACM). 1987; 21: 163-169https://doi.org/10.1145/37402.37422
        • Pearson K.
        On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space.
        Philos Mag. 1901; 2: 559-572https://doi.org/10.1080/14786440109462720
        • Welch B.L.
        The generalization of Student’s problem when several different population variances are involved.
        Biometrika. 1947; 34: 28-35https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/34.1-2.28
        • Gamba T.O.
        • Alves M.C.
        • Haiter-Neto F.
        Mandibular sexual dimorphism analysis in CBCT scans.
        J Forensic Leg Med. 2016; 38: 106-110https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2015.11.024
        • White T.D.
        • Black M.T.
        • Folkens P.A.
        Human osteology.
        Third edition. Elsevier, Burlington2012
        • Phulari B.S.
        An atlas on cephalometric landmarks.
        JB Medical, New Delhi2013
        • Santos R.M.G.
        • De Martino J.M.
        • Haiter Neto F.
        • Passeri L.A.
        Influence of different setups of the Frankfort horizontal plane on 3-dimensional cephalometric measurements.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2017; 152: 242-249https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.12.023
        • Adams G.L.
        • Gansky S.A.
        • Miller A.J.
        • Harrell Jr, W.E.
        • Hatcher D.C.
        Comparison between traditional 2-dimensional cephalometry and a 3-dimensional approach on human dry skulls.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004; 126: 397-409https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.03.023
        • van Vlijmen O.J.C.
        • Bergé S.J.
        • Swennen G.R.J.
        • Bronkhorst E.M.
        • Katsaros C.
        Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67: 92-97https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.04.025