Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Oral Investigations
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations 5/2011

01-10-2011 | Original Article

Measurements on 3D models of human skulls derived from two different cone beam CT scanners

Authors: Olivier J. C. van Vlijmen, Frits A. Rangel, Stefaan J. Bergé, Ewald M. Bronkhorst, Alfred G. Becking, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 5/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

The aims of this study were to compare measurements on three-dimensional (3D) models of human skulls derived from two different cone beam CT scanners (CBCT) and to evaluate if the used hardware can influence the performed measurements. CBCT scans of 40 dry human skulls with both the i-CAT™ and the Iluma™ cone beam CT scanners were made. From the CBCT scans, 3D models were constructed. One operator identified 19 landmarks five times on both types of 3D models with a time interval of 1 week. Intra-observer reliability was high for most measurements. There was a statistically significant and clinically relevant difference for some measurements between constructed 3D models of the same skull from the two different CBCT devices. Used hardware for scanning might influence the measurements performed. This means that care should be taken when interpreting measurements made on CBCT 3D models derived from different CBCT devices.
Literature
1.
Broadbent BH (1931) A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. Angle Orthod 1:45–66
2.
Hofrath H (1931) Bedeutung der Röntgenfern und Abstands Aufnahme für die Diagnostik der Kieferanomalien. Fortschr Orthod 1:231–258
3.
Rangel FA, Maal TJ, Bergé SJ, van Vlijmen OJ, Plooij JM, Schutyser F, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2008) Integration of digital dental casts in 3-dimensional facial photographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134:820–826PubMedCrossRef
4.
Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Bumann A, Visser H, Hirsch E (2008) Cone-beam computed tomography for routine orthodontic treatment planning: a radiation dose evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 133(640):e1–e5PubMed
5.
Hajeer MY, Ayoub AF, Millett DT, Bock M, Siebert JP (2002) Three-dimensional imaging in orthognathic surgery: the clinical application of a new method. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 17:318–330PubMed
6.
Swennen GRJ, Schutyser F (2007) Three-dimensional virtual approach to diagnosis and treatment planning of maxillo-facial deformity. In: Bell WH, Guerrero CA (eds) Distraction Osteogenesis of the Facial Skeleton. BC Decker Inc, Hamilton, pp 55–79
7.
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB (2006) Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and I-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:219–226PubMedCrossRef
8.
Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M (2008) Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 106:106–114PubMedCrossRef
9.
Greiner M, Greiner A, Hirschfelder U (2007) Variance of landmarks in digital evaluations: comparison between CT-based and conventional digital lateral cephalometric radiographs. J Orofac Orthop 68:290–298PubMedCrossRef
10.
Kumar V, Ludlow JB, Mol A, Cevidanes L (2007) Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 36:263–269PubMedCrossRef
11.
Moshiri M, Scarfe WC, Hilgers ML, Scheetz JP, Silveira AM, Farman AG (2007) Accuracy of linear measurements from imaging plate and lateral cephalometric images derived from cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 132:550–560PubMedCrossRef
12.
Van Vlijmen OJC, Bergé SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Swennen GRJ, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2009) Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:92–97PubMedCrossRef
13.
Cattaneo PM, Bloch CB, Calmar D, Hjortshoj M, Melsen B (2008) Comparison between conventional and cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134:798–802PubMedCrossRef
14.
van Vlijmen OJ, Bergé SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Swennen GR, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2009) A comparison of frontal radiographs obtained from cone beam CT scans and conventional frontal radiographs of human skulls. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:773–778PubMedCrossRef
15.
van Vlijmen OJ, Maal TJ, Bergé SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2009) A comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional cephalometry on frontal radiographs and on cone beam computed tomography scans of human skulls. Eur J Oral Sci 117:300–305PubMedCrossRef
16.
van Vlijmen OJ, Maal TJ, Bergé SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2010) A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 39:156–160PubMedCrossRef
17.
18.
Grauer D, Cevidanes LS, Styner MA, Heulfe I, Harmon ET, Zhu H, Proffit WR (2010) Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms. Angle Orthod 80:286–294PubMedCrossRef
19.
Lou L, Lagravere MO, Compton S, Major PW, Flores-Mir C (2007) Accuracy of measurements and reliability of landmark identification with computed tomography (CT) techniques in the maxillofacial area: a systematic review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 104:402–411PubMedCrossRef
20.
Muramatsu A, Nawa H, Kimura M, Yoshida K, Maeda M, Katsumata A, Ariji E, Goto S (2008) Reproducibility of maxillofacial anatomic landmarks on 3-dimensional computed tomographic images determined with the 95% confidence ellipse method. Angle Orthod 78:396–402PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Measurements on 3D models of human skulls derived from two different cone beam CT scanners
Authors
Olivier J. C. van Vlijmen
Frits A. Rangel
Stefaan J. Bergé
Ewald M. Bronkhorst
Alfred G. Becking
Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman
Publication date
01-10-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 5/2011
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0440-8

Other articles of this Issue 5/2011

Clinical Oral Investigations 5/2011 Go to the issue

Original Article

Muscle and joint forces under variable equilibrium states of the mandible

Original Article

Extramasticatory dental wear reflecting habitual behavior and health in past populations

Original Article

Immunohistochemical expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in different types of odontogenic cysts

Original Article

Oral health-related quality of life is linked with subjective well-being and depression in early old age

Original Article

Inhibition of the activity of matrix metalloproteinase 2 by triethylene glycol dimethacrylate

Original Article

Development of a validated process for manual preparation of dental transmission instruments