A Comparative Study of the Deviation of the Menton on Posteroanterior Cephalograms and Three-dimensional Computed Tomography

Overview

Journal Imaging Sci Dent

Specialty Radiology

Date 2016 Apr 7

PMID 27051637

Citations 3

Authors

Hee Jin Lee

Sungeun Lee

Eun Joo Lee

In Ja Song

Byung-Cheol Kang

Jae-Seo Lee

Hoi-Jeong Lim

Suk-Ja Yoon

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Facial asymmetry has been measured by the severity of deviation of the menton (Me) on posteroanterior (PA) cephalograms and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT). This study aimed to compare PA cephalograms and 3D CT regarding the severity of Me deviation and the direction of the Me.

Materials And Methods: PA cephalograms and 3D CT images of 35 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery (19 males and 16 females, with an average age of 22.1±3.3 years) were retrospectively reviewed in this study. By measuring the distance and direction of the Me from the midfacial reference line and the midsagittal plane in the cephalograms and 3D CT, respectively, the x-coordinates (x1 and x2) of the Me were obtained in each image. The difference between the x-coordinates was calculated and statistical analysis was performed to compare the severity of Me deviation and the direction of the Me in the two imaging modalities.

Results: A statistically significant difference in the severity of Me deviation was found between the two imaging modalities (Δx=2.45±2.03 mm, p<0.05) using the one-sample t-test. Statistically significant agreement was observed in the presence of deviation (k=0.64, p<0.05) and in the severity of Me deviation (k=0.27, p<0.05). A difference in the direction of the Me was detected in three patients (8.6%). The severity of the Me deviation was found to vary according to the imaging modality in 16 patients (45.7%).

Conclusion: The measurement of Me deviation may be different between PA cephalograms and 3D CT in some patients.

Citing Articles

Establishment of the mid-sagittal reference plane for three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry: a systematic review : Establishment of the mid-sagittal reference plane: a systematic review.

Ajmera D, Singh P, Leung Y, Khambay B, Gu M Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28(4):242.

PMID: 38575839 PMC: 10995046. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05620-7.

Accuracy of posteroanterior cephalogram landmarks and measurements identification using a cascaded convolutional neural network algorithm: A multicenter study.

Han S, Lim J, Kim J, Cho J, Hong M, Kim M Korean J Orthod. 2023; 54(1):48-58.

PMID: 38072448 PMC: 10811357. DOI: 10.4041/kjod23.075.

Effect of changing the head position on accuracy of transverse measurements of the maxillofacial region made on cone beam computed tomography and conventional posterior-anterior cephalograms.

Shokri A, Miresmaeili A, Farhadian N, Falah-Kooshki S, Amini P, Mollaie N Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017; 46(5):20160180.

PMID: 28306330 PMC: 5595030. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160180.

References

Baek C, Paeng J, Lee J, Hong J . Morphologic evaluation and classification of facial asymmetry using 3-dimensional computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 70(5):1161-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.02.135. View

Kim E, Palomo J, Kim S, Lim H, Lee K, Hwang H . Maxillofacial characteristics affecting chin deviation between mandibular retrusion and prognathism patients. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(6):988-93. PMC: 8903842. DOI: 10.2319/112210-681.1. View

Haraguchi S, Takada K, Yasuda Y . Facial asymmetry in subjects with skeletal Class III deformity. Angle Orthod. 2002; 72(1):28-35. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0028:FAISWS>2.0.CO;2. View

Cavalcanti M, Vannier M . Quantitative analysis of spiral computed tomography for craniofacial clinical applications. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000; 27(6):344-50. DOI: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600389. View

Kim S, Lee K, Lee S, Baik H . Morphologic relationship between the cranial base and the mandible in patients with facial asymmetry and mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144(3):330-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.024. View

You K, Lee K, Lee S, Baik H . Three-dimensional computed tomography analysis of mandibular morphology in patients with facial asymmetry and mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(5):540.e1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.04.025. View

Matteson S, Bechtold W, Phillips C, Staab E . A method for three-dimensional image reformation for quantitative cephalometric analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1989; 47(10):1053-61. DOI: 10.1016/0278-2391(89)90180-8. View

Hwang H, Hwang C, Lee K, Kang B . Maxillofacial 3-dimensional image analysis for the diagnosis of facial asymmetry. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(6):779-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.021. View

Chong V, Fan Y, Tng C . Pictorial review: radiology of the sphenoid bone. Clin Radiol. 1998; 53(12):882-93. DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(98)80214-6. View

10.

Baek S, Cho I, Chang Y, Kim M . Skeletodental factors affecting chin point deviation in female patients with class III malocclusion and facial asymmetry: a three-dimensional analysis using computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 104(5):628-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.03.002. View

11.

Jung Y, Kim M, Baek S . Hard and soft tissue changes after correction of mandibular prognathism and facial asymmetry by mandibular setback surgery: three-dimensional analysis using computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 107(6):763-771.e8. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.12.026. View

12.

Jensen S, Kirby J . Absent innominate (oblique orbital) line as a normal variant. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1980; 4(4):553-4. DOI: 10.1097/00004728-198008000-00032. View

13.

Yoon K, Yoon S, Kang B, Kim Y, Kook M, Lee J . Deviation of landmarks in accordance with methods of establishing reference planes in three-dimensional facial CT evaluation. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014; 44(3):207-12. PMC: 4182355. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2014.44.3.207. View

14.

Kim T, Baik J, Park J, Chae H, Huh K, Choi S . Determination of midsagittal plane for evaluation of facial asymmetry using three-dimensional computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2011; 41(2):79-84. PMC: 3174462. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2011.41.2.79. View

15.

Grummons D, Kappeyne van de Coppello M . A frontal asymmetry analysis. J Clin Orthod. 1987; 21(7):448-65. View

16.

Kwon T, Park H, Ryoo H, Lee S . A comparison of craniofacial morphology in patients with and without facial asymmetry--a three-dimensional analysis with computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 35(1):43-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2005.04.006. View

17.

Ferguson J . Cephalometric interpretation and assessment of facial asymmetry secondary to congenital torticollis. The significance of cranial base reference lines. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993; 22(1):7-10. DOI: 10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80347-9. View

18.

Yoon S, Wang R, Hwang H, Kang B, Lee J, Palomo J . Application of spherical coordinate system to facial asymmetry analysis in mandibular prognathism patients. Imaging Sci Dent. 2011; 41(3):95-100. PMC: 3189540. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2011.41.3.95. View

19.

Katsumata A, Fujishita M, Maeda M, Ariji Y, Ariji E, Langlais R . 3D-CT evaluation of facial asymmetry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 99(2):212-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.06.072. View

20.

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