Digital Evaluation and Correlation of Facial Growth Patterns Assessed on Lateral CEPH and Orthopantomogram Through ONECEPH Mobile Application

Overview

Journal J Orthod Sci

Date 2023 Jun 23

PMID 37351393

Authors

Diksha Goyal

Piush Kumar

Shubhangi Jain

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the correlation of gonial angle and three linear measurements on OPG and lateral cephalograms and their effects on the different facial patterns using the OneCeph android app.

Method: About 90 pre-treatment digital lateral cephalograms and OPGs of 90 patients were selected and divided into 3 categories, based on their growth patterns. The OPGs and lateral cephalograms were uploaded on the OneCeph android app. After calibrating using One linear measurement i.e. length of extracted premolar for OPG and ruler in radiograph for lateral cephalogram, Gonial angle (Ar- Go-Me), ANS-Me (LAFH), U1-NF, L1-MP were measured. The data were collected, tabulated, and subjected to statistical analysis using the SPSS software (version 20.0). The level of significance was kept at 5%.

Results: Values for parameters were highest in the vertical growth pattern followed by average and horizontal in both cephalogram and OPG. Upon comparison of lateral cephalogram and OPG, no significant difference was observed in gonial angle and a significant difference in LAFH and L1-MP in all three growth patterns with OPG scores greater than cephalometric tracing. The interclass coefficient test indicated almost perfect agreement for the gonial angle between the two methods. A substantial agreement was seen for U1-NF on lateral cephalogram and OPG in the vertical group. Also, a fair agreement in the vertical and horizontal group was observed in Lower anterior mandibular height.

Conclusion: Vertical parameters such as gonial angle and maxillary anterior dental height can be accurately determined on an OPG by the OneCeph application.

References

Welander U . A mathematical model of narrow beam rotation methods. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1974; 15(3):305-17. DOI: 10.1177/028418517401500309. View

Radhakrishnan P, Sapna Varma N, Ajith V . Dilemma of gonial angle measurement: Panoramic radiograph or lateral cephalogram. Imaging Sci Dent. 2017; 47(2):93-97. PMC: 5489674. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2017.47.2.93. View

Araki M, Kiyosaki T, Sato M, Kohinata K, Matsumoto K, Honda K . Comparative analysis of the gonial angle on lateral cephalometric radiographs and panoramic radiographs. J Oral Sci. 2015; 57(4):373-8. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.57.373. View

Tronje G, Welander U, McDavid W, MORRIS C . Image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. I. General considerations. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1981; 22(3A):295-9. DOI: 10.1177/028418518102203a14. View

Thanyakarn C, Hansen K, Rohlin M, Akesson L . Measurements of tooth length in panoramic radiographs. 1. The use of indicators. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1992; 21(1):26-30. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.21.1.1397447. View

Philipp R, Hurst R . The cant of the occlusal plane and distortion in the panoramic radiograph. Angle Orthod. 1978; 48(4):317-23. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1978)048<0317:TCOTOP>2.0.CO;2. View

Enoki C, Telles C, Matsumoto M . Dental-skeletal dimensions in growing individuals with variations in the lower facial height. Braz Dent J. 2004; 15(1):68-74. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402004000100013. View

Kaya D . Is There Any Difference Between Gonial Angle Values Measured on Digital Lateral Cephalograms and Orthopantomograms?. Turk J Orthod. 2020; 33(2):72-76. PMC: 7316476. DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.18076. View

Ruf S, Pancherz H . Is orthopantomography reliable for TMJ diagnosis? An experimental study on a dry skull. J Orofac Pain. 1995; 9(4):365-74. View

10.

McDavid W, Tronje G, Welander U, MORRIS C . Effects of errors in film speed and beam alignment on the image layer in rotational panoramic radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1981; 52(5):561-4. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(81)90369-8. View

11.

Larheim T, Svanaes D . Reproducibility of rotational panoramic radiography: mandibular linear dimensions and angles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1986; 90(1):45-51. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(86)90026-0. View

12.

Knigge R, McNulty K, Oh H, Hardin A, Leary E, Duren D . Geometric morphometric analysis of growth patterns among facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2021; 160(3):430-441. PMC: 8405563. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.04.038. View

13.

Nohadani N, Ruf S . Assessment of vertical facial and dentoalveolar changes using panoramic radiography. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30(3):262-8. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjm106. View

14.

Bhullar M, Uppal A, Kochhar G, Chachra S, Kochhar A . Comparison of gonial angle determination from cephalograms and orthopantomogram. Indian J Dent. 2015; 5(3):123-6. PMC: 4213870. DOI: 10.4103/0975-962X.140820. View

15.

Mohan A, Sivakumar A, Nalabothu P . Evaluation of accuracy and reliability of OneCeph digital cephalometric analysis in comparison with manual cephalometric analysis-a cross-sectional study. BDJ Open. 2021; 7(1):22. PMC: 8210970. DOI: 10.1038/s41405-021-00077-2. View

16.

Xie Q, Wolf J, Soikkonen K, Ainamo A . Height of mandibular basal bone in dentate and edentulous subjects. Acta Odontol Scand. 1996; 54(6):379-83. DOI: 10.3109/00016359609003555. View

17.

Mattila K, Altonen M, Haavikko K . Determination of the gonial angle from the orthopantomogram. Angle Orthod. 1977; 47(2):107-10. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1977)047<0107:DOTGAF>2.0.CO;2. View

18.

Samawi S, BURKE P . Angular distortion in the orthopantomogram. Br J Orthod. 1984; 11(2):100-7. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.11.2.100. View