↓ Skip to main content

Influence of magnification and superimposition of structures on cephalometric diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Influence of magnification and superimposition of structures on cephalometric diagnosis
Published in
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, January 2015
DOI 10.1590/2176-9451.20.2.029-034.oar
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonardo Koerich de Paula, Priscilla de Almeida Solon-de-Mello, Claudia Trindade Mattos, Antônio Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas, Eduardo Franzotti Sant'Anna

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of magnification and superimposition of structures on CBCT-generated lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCR) using different segments of the cranium. CBCT scans of 10 patients were selected. Four LCR were generated using Dolphin Imaging(r) software: full-face, right side, left side and center of the head. A total of 40 images were imported into Radiocef Studio 2(r), and the angles of the most common cephalometric analyses were traced by the same observer twice and within a 10-day interval. Statistical analyses included intraexaminer agreement and comparison between methods by means of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman agreement tests. Intraexaminer agreement of the angles assessed by ICC was excellent (> 0.90) for 83% of measurements, good (between 0.75 and 0.90) for 15%, and moderate (between 0.50 and 0.75) for 2% of measurements. The comparison between methods by ICC was excellent for 68% of measurements, good for 26%, and moderate for 6%. Variables presenting wider confidence intervals (> 6o) in the Bland-Altman tests, in intraexaminer assessment, were: mandibular incisor angle, maxillary incisor angle, and occlusal plane angle. And in comparison methods the variables with wider confidence interval were: mandibular incisor, maxillary incisor, GoGn, occlusal plane angle, Frankfort horizontal plane (FHP), and CoA. Superimposition of structures seemed to influence the results more than magnification, and neither one of them significantly influenced the measurements. Considerable individual variability may occur, especially for mandibular and maxillary incisors, FHP and occlusal plane.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 7 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 69%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 8 23%