Use of the Orbito-occipital Line As an Alternative to the Frankfort Line

Overview

Journal Anat Cell Biol

Specialty Anatomy & Histology

Date 2020 Apr 11

PMID 32274245

Authors

Jung-Ah Park

Tae-Jun Ha

Je-Sung Lee

Wu-Chul Song

Ki-Seok Koh

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Frankfort horizontal line, the line passing through the orbitale and porion, is one of the most widely used intracranial landmarks in cephalometric analysis. This study investigated the use of the orbito-occipital line extending from the orbitale to the external occipital protuberance as a novel horizontal line of the skull for substituting the Frankfort horizontal line. We evaluated the reproducibility of the new landmark and measured the angle between the orbito-occipital line and the Frankfort line. This study was conducted on 170 facial computed tomography (CT) scans of living adults from the Department of Plastic Surgery. After three-dimensionally reconstructed images were obtained from facial CT, the porion, orbitale, and external occipital protuberance were indicated by two observers twice. The angles between the orbito-meatal line (inferior orbital rim to porion; the Frankfort line) and the orbito-occipital line (inferior orbital rim to external occipital protuberance) were measured. There was no significant intraobserver or interobserver bias. The overall angle between the Frankfort line and orbito-occipital line was -0.5°±2.2° (mean±standard deviation). There was no statistically significant difference among side and sex. This study demonstrated good reproducibility of a new landmark-the external occipital protuberance-tested to replace the porion. The orbito-occipital line is a reliable, reproducible, and easily identifiable line, and has potential as a novel standard horizontal line to replace or at least supplement the Frankfort line in anthropological studies and certain clinical applications.

References

Madsen D, Sampson W, Townsend G . Craniofacial reference plane variation and natural head position. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30(5):532-40. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjn031. View

Olmez H, Gorgulu S, Akin E, Bengi A, Tekdemir I, Ors F . Measurement accuracy of a computer-assisted three-dimensional analysis and a conventional two-dimensional method. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(3):375-82. PMC: 8923535. DOI: 10.2319/070810-387.1. View

Pittayapat P, Limchaichana-Bolstad N, Willems G, Jacobs R . Three-dimensional cephalometric analysis in orthodontics: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2013; 17(2):69-91. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12034. View

Pittayapat P, Jacobs R, Bornstein M, Odri G, Lambrichts I, Willems G . Three-dimensional Frankfort horizontal plane for 3D cephalometry: a comparative assessment of conventional versus novel landmarks and horizontal planes. Eur J Orthod. 2017; 40(3):239-248. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjx066. View

Shahidi S, Shahidi S, Oshagh M, Gozin F, Salehi P, Danaei S . Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks by a designed software. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012; 42(1):20110187. PMC: 3746488. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20110187. View

Olszewski R, Zech F, Cosnard G, Nicolas V, Macq B, Reychler H . Three-dimensional computed tomography cephalometric craniofacial analysis: experimental validation in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007; 36(9):828-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2007.05.022. View

Lundstrom A, Lundstrom F . The Frankfort horizontal as a basis for cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107(5):537-40. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(95)70121-4. View

Kattan E, Kattan M, Elhiny O . A New Horizontal Plane of the Head. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2018; 6(5):767-771. PMC: 5985866. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2018.172. View

Rossini G, Cavallini C, Cassetta M, Barbato E . 3D cephalometric analysis obtained from computed tomography. Review of the literature. Ann Stomatol (Roma). 2012; 2(3-4):31-9. PMC: 3314320. View

10.

Casado A . Quantifying Sexual Dimorphism in the Human Cranium: A Preliminary Analysis of a Novel Method. J Forensic Sci. 2017; 62(5):1259-1265. DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.13441. View

11.

Gupta A, Kharbanda O, Sardana V, Balachandran R, Sardana H . Accuracy of 3D cephalometric measurements based on an automatic knowledge-based landmark detection algorithm. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015; 11(7):1297-309. DOI: 10.1007/s11548-015-1334-7. View

12.

Veyre-Goulet S, Mercier C, Robin O, Guerin C . Recent human sexual dimorphism study using cephalometric plots on lateral teleradiography and discriminant function analysis. J Forensic Sci. 2008; 53(4):786-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00759.x. View

13.

Ryu H, Chong H, An K, Kang K . Short-term and long-term treatment outcomes with Class III activator. Korean J Orthod. 2015; 45(5):226-35. PMC: 4593867. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2015.45.5.226. View

14.

Hassan B, Nijkamp P, Verheij H, Tairie J, Vink C, van der Stelt P . Precision of identifying cephalometric landmarks with cone beam computed tomography in vivo. Eur J Orthod. 2011; 35(1):38-44. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjr050. View

15.

Chen Y, Chen S, Chang H, Chen K . Comparison of landmark identification in traditional versus computer-aided digital cephalometry. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70(5):387-92. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2000)070<0387:COLIIT>2.0.CO;2. View

16.

Chien P, Parks E, Eraso F, Hartsfield J, Roberts W, Ofner S . Comparison of reliability in anatomical landmark identification using two-dimensional digital cephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009; 38(5):262-73. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/81889955. View

17.

Lundstrom A, Lundstrom F, LEBRET L, MOORREES C . Natural head position and natural head orientation: basic considerations in cephalometric analysis and research. Eur J Orthod. 1995; 17(2):111-20. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/17.2.111. View

18.

Chaconas S, Fragiskos F . Orthognathic diagnosis and treatment planning: a cephalometric approach. J Oral Rehabil. 1991; 18(6):531-45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1991.tb00076.x. View

19.

Devereux L, Moles D, Cunningham S, McKnight M . How important are lateral cephalometric radiographs in orthodontic treatment planning?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(2):e175-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.09.021. View

20.

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