대한소아치과학회지 (Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry)

  • 제39권2호
  • /
  • Pages.139-144
  • /
  • 2012
  • /
  • 1226-8496(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-3819(eISSN)
대한소아치과학회 (Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Cone-beam computed tomography를 이용한 미맹출 영구치의 계측

ACCURACY OF CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN PREDICTING THE DIAMETER OF UNERUPTED TEETH

  • 김성희 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김영종 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김신 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 정태성 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 소아치과학교실)
  • Kim, Seong-Hee (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Jong (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Kim, Shin (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Jeong, Tae-Sung (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 투고 : 2012.02.28
  • 심사 : 2012.05.15
  • 발행 : 2012.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 CBCT(Cone-beam computed tomography)영상에서 미맹출 치아 크기 측정의 재현성과 정확성을 평가하기 위해 시행되었다. 매복치를 주소로 부산대학교 치과병원 소아치과에 내원한 혼합치열기 환자 중 진단 목적으로 CBCT 채득에 동의한 환자의 미맹출 견치 및 소구치 69개를 대상으로 하였다. CBCT 영상에서 측정한 미맹출 치아의 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치와 동일한 치아가 구강 내로 완전히 맹출한 후 채득한 석고 모형에서 대상 치아를 digital caliper로 측정한 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치를 비교하여 다음과 같은 결론을 얻었다. 1. CBCT 영상에서 미맹출 치아를 계측하는 방법은 재현성이 높다(ICC=0.91). 2. CBCT 영상에서 측정한 미맹출 치아의 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치와 석고 모형에서 측정한 대상 치아의 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치는 높은 상관 관계가 있었다(r=0.91). 3. CBCT 영상에서 측정한 미맹출 치아 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치와 석고 모형에서 측정한 대상 치아의 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다($p$ <0.05). CBCT 영상에서 측정한 미맹출 치아 최대 근원심 폭경의 계측치가 석고 모형에서 측정한 대상 치아의 최대 근원심 폭경 계측치보다 평균 0.2 mm 작게 측정되었다. 그러나 이러한 차이는 임상적으로 수용 가능한 수준이라 생각된다.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of measuring the size of unerupted permanent tooth via cone beam computed tomography(CBCT). Ten children were scanned with dental CBCT, and 3-dimensional reconstruction of the dentitions were generated CBCT. Mesio-distal dimension and buccolingual dimension of the teeth were made directly on the model with a high-precision digitalcaliper and on the CBCT by using three-dimensional dental imaging software. Reliability and accuracy were assessed by using intraclass correlation and paired $t$-tests. ($p$ <0.05) The results were as follows : 1. Intraclass correlations were above 0.9 for Both the CBCT and the model measurements, showinghigh reliability. 2. Although there were high correlation values(r=0.91) between CBCT and model messurement methods, comparisons between the CBCT and model messurement methods showed a statistically significant difference($p$ <0.05). 3. The CBCT measurements tended to slightly underestimate by 0.2 mm. But, the systematic difference of CBCT measurements were clinically acceptable Therefore, CBCT measurement method can be used to measure the size of unerupted teeth in a sufficiently accurate way.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 대한소아치과학회 : 소아.청소년 치과학 제4판. 신흥 인터내셔날, 서울, 566-567, 2007.
  2. Nguyen E, Boychuk D, Orellana M : Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography inpredicting the diameter of unerupted teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 140(2):59-66, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.12.017
  3. Steigman S, Harari D, Kuraita-LandmanS : Relationship betweenmesiodistal crown diameter of posterior deciduous and succedaneousteeth in Israeli children. Eur J Orthod, 4:219-27, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/4.3.219
  4. Pancherz H, Schaffer C : Individual-based prediction of the size ofthe supporting zones in the permanent dentition. A comparison ofthe Moyers method with a unitary prediction value. J Orofac Orthop, 60:227-35, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01299781
  5. Schwarz AM : Uber die gultigkeit der pontschenwerte. Fortschr Orthod, 1:258-60, 1931.
  6. Trankmann J, Mohrmann G, ThemmP : Comparative studies of theprognosis of supporting areas. Fortschr Kieferorthop, 51:189-94, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02164570
  7. Legovic M, HautzZ : Spacing of permanent incisors and its influenceon the available space for mandibular canines and premolars. ActaStomatol Croat, 23:291-302, 1989.
  8. Bachmann S : Prediction of space requirements in the supportzones using multiple regression equations. Fortschr Kieferorthop, 47:79-86, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02167599
  9. Tanaka MM, Johnston LE : The prediction of the size of uneruptedcanines and premolars in a contemporary orthodontic population.J Am Dent Assoc, 88:798-801, 1974. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1974.0158
  10. Moyers RE : Handbook of orthodontics for the student and generalpractitioner. 3d ed. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers,1972.
  11. Ballard ML, Wylie WL : Mixed dentition case analysis, estimatingsize of unerupted permanent teeth. Am J Orthod, 33:754-9, 1947.
  12. Foster HR, Wylie WL : Arch length deficiency in the mixed dentition.Am J Orthod, 44:464-76, 1958. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(58)90004-6
  13. Nance HN : The limitations of orthodontic treatment, diagnosisand treatment in the permanent dentition. Am J Orthod, 43:36-84, 1947.
  14. Bishara SE, Staley RN : Mixed-dentition mandibular arch lengthanalysis: a step-by-step approach using the revised Hixon-Oldfather prediction method. Am J Orthod, 86:130-5, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90304-X
  15. Herren P, Reisfeld S : The long-cone x-ray technic for the prognosis of the breadth of crowns of not yet erupted premolars. SSOSchweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd, 80:480-98, 1970.
  16. Lutz B : Studies on the distortion factor of intra-oral radiographs of the lateral region. Dtsch Stomatol, 19:767-75, 1969.
  17. Hixon EH, OldfatherRE : Estimation of size of unerupted cuspidand bicuspid teeth. Angle Orthod, 28:236-40, 1958.
  18. William R. Proffit : Contemporary Orthodontics. 4th edition. 대한나래출판사, 서울, 93, 2008.
  19. Goaz P W. White S C : Oral radiology:principles and interpretation. 3rd edn. Mosby, St Louis, 242-244, 1994.
  20. Botticelli S, Verna C, Cattaneo PM, et al. : Twoversus three-dimensional imaging in subjects with unerupted maxillary canies. Eur J Orthod, 33(4): 344-9, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq102
  21. William C. Scarfe, Allan G, et al. : What is Cone-Beam CT and How Does it Work? Dent Clin N Am, 52: 707-730, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.05.005
  22. Steven L. Hechler : Cone-Beam CT: Applicationsin Orthodontics. Dent Clin N Am, 52:809-823, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.05.001
  23. Nakajima A, Sameshima GT, Arai Y, et al. : Two-and three-dimensional orthodontic imaging using limited cone beam-computed tomography. Angle Orthod, 75:895-903, 2005.
  24. Walker L, Enciso R, MahJ : Three-dimensional localizationof maxillary canines with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 128:418-423, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.04.033
  25. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Abdallah EM, et al. : Comparisons of mesiodistal and buccolingual crown dimensions of the permanent teeth in three populations from Egypt, Mexico, and the United States. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 96(5):416-22, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(89)90326-0
  26. William R. Proffit : Contemporary Orthodontics. 대한나래출판사, 서울, 93, 2008
  27. Sharon L. Brooks. CBCT Dosimetry : Orthodontic Considerations. Semin Orthod, 15:14-18, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2008.09.002
  28. Brand JW, Gibbs SJ, Edwards M, et al. : Radiation protectionin dentistry. NCRP Report No. 145, 2003.
  29. Farman AG : ALARA still applies [editorial]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 100:395-397, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.05.055
  30. 임미영, 임성훈 : 석고모형, 레이저스캔 디지털모형, 콘빔 CT 영상간의 모형분석 계측치 비교. 대치교정지, 39(1):6-17, 2009.
  31. Baumgaertel S, Palomo JM, Palomo L, et al. : Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 136(1):19-25, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.09.016
  32. Schultz E, Felix R : Phantom measurements of spatial resolutionand the partial-volume-effect in computer tomography. RoFo, 129:673-8, 1978 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1231185
  33. Glover GH, PelcNJ : Nonlinear partial volume artefacts in x-raycomputed tomography. Med Phys, 7:238-48, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.594678