Reproducibility of Frankfort Horizontal Plane on 3D Multi-planar Reconstructed MR Images

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2012 Nov 3

PMID 23118970

Citations 11

Authors

Amro Daboul

Christian Schwahn

Grit Schaffner

Silvia Soehnel

Stefanie Samietz

Ahmad Aljaghsi

Mohamad Habes

Mohammad Habes

Katrin Hegenscheid

Ralf Puls

Thomas Klinke

Reiner Biffar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and reliability of Frankfort horizontal plane identification using displays of multi-planar reconstructed MRI images, and propose it as a sufficiently stable and standardized reference plane for craniofacial structures.

Materials And Methods: MRI images of 43 subjects were obtained from the longitudinal population based cohort study SHIP-2 using a T1-weighted 3D sequence. Five examiners independently identified the three landmarks that form FH plane. Intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reliability, correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficient of variability and Bland-Altman plots were obtained for all landmarks coordinates to assess reproducibility. Intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reliability in terms of location and plane angulation were also assessed.

Results: Intra- and inter-examiner reliabilities for X, Y and Z coordinates of all three landmarks were excellent with ICC values ranging from 0.914 to 0.998. Differences among examiners were more in X and Z than in Y dimensions. The Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated excellent intra- as well as inter-examiner agreement between examiners in all coordinates for all landmarks. Intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reliability of the three landmarks in terms of distance showed mean differences between 1.3 to 2.9 mm, Mean differences in plane angulation were between 1.0° to 1.5° among examiners.

Conclusion: This study revealed excellent intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reliability of Frankfort Horizontal plane through 3D landmark identification in MRI. Sufficiently stable landmark-based reference plane could be used for different treatments and studies.

Citing Articles

Feasibility of craniofacial landmark plotting on magnetic resonance images.

Rana S, Sharma A, Gupta A, Vichare S, Rajagopalan A Odontology. 2025; .

PMID: 40064745 DOI: 10.1007/s10266-025-01077-6.

Definition of a coordinate system for multi-modal images of the temporal bone and inner ear.

Copson B, Wijewickrema S, Slinger C, Youssef D, Gerard J, OLeary S PLoS One. 2024; 19(10):e0294828.

PMID: 39374254 PMC: 11458053. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294828.

Accuracy of Instrumented Mouthguards During Direct Jaw Impacts Seen in Boxing.

Venkatraman J, Abrams M, Sherman D, Ortiz-Paparoni M, Bercaw J, MacDonald R Ann Biomed Eng. 2024; 52(12):3219-3227.

PMID: 39028399 DOI: 10.1007/s10439-024-03586-x.

Biofidelity and Limitations of Instrumented Mouthguard Systems for Assessment of Rigid Body Head Kinematics.

Abrams M, Venkatraman J, Sherman D, Ortiz-Paparoni M, Bercaw J, MacDonald R Ann Biomed Eng. 2024; 52(10):2872-2883.

PMID: 38910203 DOI: 10.1007/s10439-024-03563-4.

Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts caused by orthodontic appliances and/or implant-supported prosthesis: a systematic review.

Johannsen K, Fuglsig J, Hansen B, Wenzel A, Spin-Neto R Oral Radiol. 2022; 39(2):394-407.

PMID: 36178613 DOI: 10.1007/s11282-022-00652-9.

References

Lam E, Hannam A, Christiansen E . Estimation of tendon-plane orientation within human masseter muscle from reconstructed magnetic resonance images. Arch Oral Biol. 1991; 36(11):845-53. DOI: 10.1016/0003-9969(91)90034-r. View

Volzke H, Alte D, Schmidt C, Radke D, Lorbeer R, Friedrich N . Cohort profile: the study of health in Pomerania. Int J Epidemiol. 2010; 40(2):294-307. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp394. View

Ferrario V, Sforza C, Germano D, Dalloca L, Miani Jr A . Head posture and cephalometric analyses: an integrated photographic/radiographic technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106(3):257-64. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70045-1. View

Olszewski R, Tanesy O, Cosnard G, Zech F, Reychler H . Reproducibility of osseous landmarks used for computed tomography based three-dimensional cephalometric analyses. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009; 38(3):214-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2009.05.005. View

Damstra J, Fourie Z, De Wit M, Ren Y . A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry. Clin Oral Investig. 2011; 16(1):285-94. PMC: 3259389. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0512-4. View

Shrout P, Fleiss J . Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979; 86(2):420-8. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420. View

de Oliveira A, Cevidanes L, Phillips C, Motta A, Burke B, Tyndall D . Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 107(2):256-65. PMC: 2642991. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.05.039. View

Hatipoglu H, Ozcan H, Hatipoglu U, Yuksel E . Age, sex and body mass index in relation to calvarial diploe thickness and craniometric data on MRI. Forensic Sci Int. 2008; 182(1-3):46-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.09.014. View

Lagravere M, Secanell M, Major P, Carey J . Optimization analysis for plane orientation in 3-dimensional cephalometric analysis of serial cone-beam computerized tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011; 111(6):771-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.02.017. View

10.

Halazonetis D . Estimated natural head position and facial morphology. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121(4):364-8. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.121663. View

11.

Kragskov J, Bosch C, Gyldensted C, Sindet-Pedersen S . Comparison of the reliability of craniofacial anatomic landmarks based on cephalometric radiographs and three-dimensional CT scans. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997; 34(2):111-6. DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569_1997_034_0111_cotroc_2.3.co_2. View

12.

HOUSTON W . The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83(5):382-90. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(83)90322-6. View

13.

Muramatsu A, Nawa H, Kimura M, Yoshida K, Maeda M, Katsumata A . Reproducibility of maxillofacial anatomic landmarks on 3-dimensional computed tomographic images determined with the 95% confidence ellipse method. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78(3):396-402. DOI: 10.2319/040207-166.1. View

14.

Trpkova B, Major P, Prasad N, Nebbe B . Cephalometric landmarks identification and reproducibility: a meta analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 112(2):165-70. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(97)70242-7. View

15.

Guler N, Yatmaz P, Ataoglu H, Emlik D, Uckan S . Temporomandibular internal derangement: correlation of MRI findings with clinical symptoms of pain and joint sounds in patients with bruxing behaviour. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004; 32(5):304-10. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/24534480. View

16.

Bland J, Altman D . Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307-10. View

17.

Gray C, Redpath T, Smith F . Magnetic resonance imaging: a useful tool for evaluation of bone prior to implant surgery. Br Dent J. 1998; 184(12):603-7. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4809707. View

18.

Pancherz H, Gokbuget K . The reliability of the Frankfort Horizontal in roentgenographic cephalometry. Eur J Orthod. 1996; 18(4):367-72. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/18.4.367. View

19.

Waitzman A, Posnick J, Armstrong D, Pron G . Craniofacial skeletal measurements based on computed tomography: Part I. Accuracy and reproducibility. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992; 29(2):112-7. DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569_1992_029_0112_csmboc_2.3.co_2. View

20.

Goto T, Nishida S, Nakamura Y, Tokumori K, Nakamura Y, Kobayashi K . The accuracy of 3-dimensional magnetic resonance 3D vibe images of the mandible: an in vitro comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 103(4):550-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.03.011. View