Browse > Article

The comparison of landmark identification errors and reproducibility between conventional lateral cephalometric radiography and digital lateral cephalometric radiography  

Lee, Yang-Ku (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Yang, Won-Sik (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Chang, Young-Il (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
The korean journal of orthodontics / v.32, no.2, 2002 , pp. 79-89 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the reproducibility and errors in landmark identification of conventional lateral cephalometric radiography and digital lateral cephalometric radiography. Fifteen conventional lateral cephalometric radiographs and fifteen digital lateral cephalometric radiographs were selected in adults with no considerations on sex and craniofacial forms. Each landmark was identified and expressed as the coordinate (x, y). The landmarks were classified into 3 groups. The landmarks of the first identification was T1, identification after one week was T2, and identification after one month was T3. The mean and standard deviation of identification errors between replicates were calculated according to the x and y coordinates. The errors between first identification and second identification were expressed as T2-T1(x), T2-T1(y) and those between first identification and third identification were expressed as T3-T1(x), T2-T1(y). Each was divided into conventional lateral cephalometric radiography and digital lateral cephalometric radiography. The independent t- test was used for statistical analysis of identification errors for the evaluation of reproducibility. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. Generally, the mean and standard deviation of landmark identification errors in digital lateral cephalometric radiography was smaller than those of conventional lateral cephalometric radiography. 2. Only a few landmarks showed statistically significant difference in identification error between conventional lateral cephalometric radiography and digital lateral cephalometric radiography. 3. The enhancement of image quality didn't guarantee decrease in landmark identification error and didn't affect tendency of landmark identification error.
Keywords
Conventional lateral cephalometric radiography; Digital lateral cephalometric radiography; Landmark Error;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Broadbent BH. A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontics, Angle Orthod 1931 : 1 : 45-66
2 RobertE. Moyers, Handbook of Orthodontics, year bookmedical publishers 1988 : 249-50
3 Bawnrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements. 2 conventional angular and linear measures. Am J Orthod 1971 : 60 : 505-17   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Graber TM. A Critical Review of Clinical Cephalometric Radiogrphy. Am J Orthod 1954 : 40 : 1-26   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, Roberts CT. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiography, part II : image quarity. Angle Orthod 1996 : 66: 43-50   PUBMED
6 Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York. 1940. Interscience Publications
7 Jia-Kuang Liu, Yen-Ting Chen. Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks. AJODO 2000 : 118 : 535-40
8 Sekiguchi T, Savara BS. Savara, Variability of cephalometric landmarks used for face growth studies. Am J Orthod 1972 : 61 : 603-18   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Tng TT, Chan TC, Hagg D, Cooke MS. Validity of cephalometric landmarks: an experimental study on human skull. Europ J Orthod 1994 : 16 : 110-20   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Johnson NA. Xeroradiography for cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod 1976 : 69 : 524-6   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Spolyar JL, Head positioning error in cephalometric radiography-an implant study. Angle Orthod 1987 : 57 : 77-88   PUBMED
12 Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiography, part I : advantages and limitations of digital imaging. Angle Orhod, 66 : 37-42, 1996
13 Savara B, Takeuchi Y. Anatomical location of cephalometric landmarks on the sphenoid and temporal bones. Angle Orthod 1979 : 49 : 141-9   PUBMED
14 Broch J, Slagsvold O, RosIer M. Error in landmark identification in lateral radiographic headplates. Europ J Orthod 1981 : 3 : 9-13   DOI   ScienceOn
15 양원식, 김태우, 치과교정진단 및 응용, 지성출판사 2001 : 85-6
16 Cook PA, Southall PJ. The reliability of mandibular radiographic superimposition. Br J Orthod. 1989 : 16 : 25-30   DOI   PUBMED
17 Bawnrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements, 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod 1971 : 60 : 111-27   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Mouyen F. Benz C. Sonnabend E. Lodter JP. Presentationand physical evaluation of Radio Visio Graphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1989 : 68 : 238-42   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Eppley BL, Sadove AM. Computerized digital enhancement in craniofacial cephalometric radiography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991 : 49 : 1038-43   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Richardson A. An investigation into the reproducibility of some points, planes and lines used in cephalometric analysis.Am J Orthod 1966 : 52 : 637-51   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
21 Van der Linden F. A study of roetgenocephalornetric bony landmarks. Am J Orthod 1971 : 59 : 111-25   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Forsyth DB, Davis DN. Assessment of an automated cephalometric analysis system. Europ J Orthod 1996 : 18 : 471-8   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Cooke MS, Wei SH. Cephalometric errors: A comparison between repeat measurements and retaken radiographs. Australian Dental J 1991 : 36 : 38-43   DOI   ScienceOn