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
BMC Medical Imaging
Published in: BMC Medical Imaging 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

The application and accuracy of feature matching on automated cephalometric superimposition

Authors: Yiran Jiang, Guangying Song, Xiaonan Yu, Yuanbo Dou, Qingfeng Li, Siqi Liu, Bing Han, Tianmin Xu

Published in: BMC Medical Imaging | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to establish a computer-aided automated method for cephalometric superimposition and to evaluate the accuracy of this method based on free-hand tracing.

Methods

Twenty-eight pairs of pre-treatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2) cephalograms were selected. Structural superimpositions of the anterior cranial base, maxilla and mandible were independently completed by three operators performing traditional hand tracing methods and by computerized automation using the feature matching algorithm. To quantitatively evaluate the differences between the two methods, the hand superimposed patterns were digitized. After automated and hand superimposition of T2 cephalograms to T1 cephalometric templates, landmark distances between paired automated and hand T2 cephalometric landmarks were measured. Differences in hand superimposition among the operators were also calculated.

Results

The T2 landmark differences in hand tracing between the operators ranged from 0.61 mm to 1.65 mm for the three types of superimposition. There were no significant differences in accuracy between hand and automated superimposition (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Computer-aided cephalometric superimposition provides comparably accurate results to those of traditional hand tracing and will provide a powerful tool for academic research.
Literature
1.
Broadbent BH. A new x-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. The introduction of cephalometric radiology. Angle Orthod. 1931;1(1):45–66.
2.
Baumrind S, Miller D, Molthen R. The reliability of head film measurements: 3. Tracing superimposition. Am J Orthod. 1976;70(6):617–44.CrossRef
3.
Huja SS, Grubaugh EL, Rummel AM, Fields HW, Beck FM. Comparison of hand-traced and computer-based Cephalometric superimpositions. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(3):428–35.CrossRef
4.
Gilddon MJ, Xia JJ, Gateno J, Wong HTF, Lasky RE, Teichgraeber JF, Jia XL, Liebschner MAK, Lemoine JJ. The accuracy of Cephalometric tracing superimposition. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64(2):194–202.CrossRef
5.
Roden-Johnston D, English J, Gallerano R. Comparison of hand-traced and computerized cephalograms: landmark identification, measurement, and superimposition accuracy. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2008;133(4):556–64.CrossRef
6.
Cook PA, Gravely JF. Tracing error with Björk’s mandibular superimposition. Angle Orthod. 1988;58(2):169–78.PubMed
7.
Tsorovas G, Karsten AL. A comparison of hand-tracing and cephalometric analysis computer programs with and without advanced feature accuracy and time demands. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(5):721–8.CrossRef
8.
Yue WN, Yin DL, Li CJ, Wang GP, Xu TM. 2006. Automated 2-D Cephalometric analysis on X-ray image by a model-based approach. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2006;53(8):1615–23.CrossRef
9.
Chen YJ, Chen SK, Yao JC, Chang HF. The effects of differences in landmark identification on the cephalometric measurements in traditional versus digitized cephalometry. Angle Orthod. 2004;74(2):155–61.PubMed
10.
Ongkosuwito EM, Katsaros C, van’t Hof MA, Bodegom JC, Kuijpers-Jagtaman AM. The reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of analogue and digital methods. Eur J Orthod. 2002;24(6):655–65.CrossRef
11.
Baumrind S, Miller D. Computer-aided head film analysis: the University of California san Francisco method. Am J Orthod. 1980;78(1):41–65.CrossRef
12.
Polat-Ozsoy O, Gokcelik A, Toygar Memikoglu TU. Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31(3):254–9.CrossRef
13.
Jacquet W, Nyssen E, Bottenberg P, de Groen P, Vande VB. Novel information theory based method for superimposition of lateral head radiographs and cone beam computed tomography images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2019;39(8):191–8.
14.
Nabipour S, OH H, Boyd R, Baumrind S. Comparative reliability of cephalometric superimpositions: computer monitor versus acetate standard. IADR Thursday, March 17, 2011: 3:30 p.m. -4:45 p.m.
15.
Lévy-Mandel AD, Venetsanopoulos AN, Tsotsos JK. Knowledge-based landmarking of cephalograms. Comput Biomed Res. 1986;19(3):282–309.CrossRef
16.
Cardillo J, Sid-Ahmed MA. An image processing system for locating craniofacial landmarks. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1994;13(2):275–89.CrossRef
17.
Arik SÖ, Ibragimov B, Xing L. Fully automated quantitative cephalometry using convolutional neural networks. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2017;4(1):014501.CrossRef
18.
Bjork A, Skieller V. Roentgencephalometric growth analysis of the maxilla. Trans Eur Orthod Soc. 1977;7:209–33.
19.
Bjork A. Facial growth in man studied with the aid of metallic implants. Acta Odontol Scand. 1955;13(1):9–34.CrossRef
20.
Bjork A. Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res. 1963;42(1):400–11.CrossRef
21.
Nielsen IL. Maxillary superimposition: a comparison of three methods for cephalometric evaluation of growth and treatment change. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1989;95(5):422–31.CrossRef
22.
Gu Y, McNamara JA Jr. Cephalometric superimpositions. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(6):967–76.CrossRef
23.
Rublee E, Rabaud V, Konolige K, Bradski GR. ORB: an efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, ICCV 2011. Barcelona: IEEE; 2011.
24.
Bian JW, Lin WY, Matsushita Y, Yeung SK, Nguyen TD, Cheng MM. GMS: grid-based motion statistics for Fast, ultra robust feature correspondence. 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). Honolulu: 2017. p. 2828–37.
25.
Johnston LE Jr. Balancing the books on orthodontic treatment: an integrated analysis of change. Br J Orthod. 1996;23(2):93–102.CrossRef
26.
Rosten E, Drummond T. Machine learning for highspeed corner detection. In: Computer Vision—ECCV; 2006. p. 430–43.
27.
Al-Okaily A. Error tree: a tree structure for hamming & edit distances & wildcards matching. J Comput Biol. 2015;22(12):1118–28.CrossRef
28.
Baumrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements:1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod. 1971;60(2):111–27.CrossRef
29.
Baumrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements:2. Conventional angular and linear measures. Am J Orthod. 1971;60(5):505–17.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The application and accuracy of feature matching on automated cephalometric superimposition
Authors
Yiran Jiang
Guangying Song
Xiaonan Yu
Yuanbo Dou
Qingfeng Li
Siqi Liu
Bing Han
Tianmin Xu
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Imaging / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2342
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-020-00432-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Medical Imaging 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Diffusion tensor imaging quantifying the severity of chronic hepatitis in rats

Research article

Repeatability of small lung nodule measurement in low-dose lung screening: a phantom study

Research article

Imaging features of the initial chest thin-section CT scans from 110 patients after admission with suspected or confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19

Research article

Diagnostic performance of ultrasonography, dual-phase 99mTc-MIBI scintigraphy, early and delayed 99mTc-MIBI SPECT/CT in preoperative parathyroid gland localization in secondary hyperparathyroidism

Research article

Comparison of three dimensional reconstruction and conventional computer tomography angiography in patients undergoing zero-ischemia laparoscopic partial nephrectomy

Research article

The independent indicators for differentiating renal cell carcinoma from renal angiomyolipoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound