Comparison of linear and angular measurements in CBCT scans using 2D and 3D rendering software

References

• Moshiri M, Scarfe WC, Hilgers ML, et al. Accuracy of linear measurements from imaging plate and lateral cephalometric images derived from cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132:550–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Vlijmen OJ, Maal T, Bergé SJ, et al. A comparison between 2-D and 3-D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39:156–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamora N, Llamas JM, Cibrián R, et al. Cephalometric measurements from 3-D reconstructed images compared with conventional 2-D images. Angle Orthod. 2011;81:856–864.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oz U, Orhan K, Abe N. Comparison of linear and angular measurements using two-dimensional conventional methods and three-dimensional cone beam CT images reconstructed from a volumetric rendering program in vivo. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:492–500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chien PC, Parks ET, Eraso F, et al. Comparison of reliability in anatomical landmark identification using two-dimensional digital cephalometrics and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in vivo. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:262–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nalçaci R, Oztürk F, Sökücü O. A comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurements. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39:100–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod. 1971;60:111–127.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swennen GR, Schutyser F. Three-dimensional virtual approach to diagnosis and treatment planning of maxilla-facial deformity. In: Bell W, editor. Distraction osteogenesis of the facial skeleton. Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker, Inc.; 2007. p. 55.
   Google Scholar
• van Vlijmen OJ, Bergé SJ, Swennen GR, et al. Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:92–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreira CR, Sales MA, Lopes PM, et al. Assessment of linear and angular measurements on three-dimensional cone beam computed tomographic images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108:430–436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farman AG, Scarfe WC. Development of imaging selection criteria and procedures should precede cephalometric assessment with cone beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:257–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc. 2006;72:75–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Periago DR, Scarfe WC, Moshiri M, et al. Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived three-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:387–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludlow JB, Gubler M, Cevidanes L, et al. Precision of cephalometric landmark identification: cone beam computed tomography vs conventional cephalometric views. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136:312–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown AA, Scarfe WC, Scheetz JP, et al. Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3-D images. Angle Orthod. 2009;79:150–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, et al. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998;8:1558–1564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM. Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:291–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moerenhout BA, Gelaude F, Swennen GR, et al. Accuracy and repeatability of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements used in the determination of facial indices in the laboratory setup. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37:18–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinsky HM, Dyda S, Pinsky RW, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:410–416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagravère MO, Carey J, Toogood RW, et al. Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134:112–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Oliveira AE, Cevidanes LH, Phillips C, et al. Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:256–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naji P, Alsufyani NA, Lagravère MO. Reliability of anatomic structures as landmarks in three-dimensional cephalometric analysis using CBCT. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:762–772.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawchuk D, Alhadlaq A, Alkhadra T, et al. Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software. J Orthod Sci. 2014;3:111–117.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yoon YJ, Kim DH, Yu PS, et al. Effect of head rotation on posteroanterior cephalometric radiographs. Angle Orthod. 2002;72:36–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malkoc S, Sari Z, Usumez S, et al. The effect of head rotation on cephalometric radiographs. Eur J Orthod. 2005;27:315–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Sanderink G. Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements obtained from cone beam computed tomography surface-rendered images for cephalometric analysis: influence of patient scanning position. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31:129–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar V, Ludlow J, Soares Cevidanes LH, et al. In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:873–879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrell WE Jr. 3-D Diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics. Semin Orthod. 2009;15:35–41.
   Google Scholar
• Harrell WE Jr., Hatcher DC, Bolt RL. In search of anatomic truth: 3-dimensional digital modeling and the future of orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;122:325–330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrell WE Jr., Stanford S, Bralower P. ADA initiates development of orthodontic informatics standards. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128:153–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tepper G, Hofschneider UB, Gahleitner A, et al. Computed tomographic diagnosis and localization of bone canals in the mandibular interforaminal region for prevention of bleeding complications during implant surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16:68–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs R, Mraiwa N, vanSteenberghe D, et al. Appearance, location, course, and morphology of the mandibular incisive canal: an assessment on spiral CT scan. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;31:322–327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longoni S, Sartori M, Braun M, et al. Lingual vascular canals of the mandible: the risk of bleeding complications during implant procedures. Implant Dent. 2007;16:131–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagravère MO, Gordon JM, Guedes IH, et al. Reliability of traditional cephalometric landmarks as seen in three-dimensional analysis in maxillary expansion treatments. Angle Orthod. 2009;79:1047–1056.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polat-Ozsoy O, Gokcelik A, ToygarMemikoglu TU. Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31:254–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santoro M, Jarjoura K, Cangialosi TJ. Accuracy of digital and analogue cephalometric measurements assessed with the sandwich technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;129:345–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes PM, Moreira CR, Perrella A, et al. 3-D volume rendering maxillofacial analysis of angular measurements by multislice CT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105:224–230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farronato G, Salvadori S, Nolet F, et al. Assessment of inter- and intra-operator cephalometric tracings on cone beam CT radiographs: comparison of the precision of the cone beam CT versus the latero-lateral radiograph tracing. Prog Orthod. 2014;15:1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Michele C, Federica A, Roberto DG, et al. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional cephalometry using cone beam computed tomography scans. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26:e311–e315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shokri A, Khajeh S, Khavid A. Evaluation of the accuracy of linear measurements on lateral cephalograms obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans with digital lateral cephalometric radiography: an in vitro study. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25:1710–1713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olszewski R, Zech F, Cosnard G, et al. Three-dimensional computed tomography cephalometric craniofacial analysis: experimental validation in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36:828–833.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittayapat P, Bornstein MM, Imada TS, et al. Accuracy of linear measurements using three imaging modalities: two lateral cephalograms and one 3-D model from CBCT data. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37:202–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittayapat P, Jacobs R, Odri GA, et al. Reproducibility of the sella turcica landmark in three dimensions using a sella turcica-specific reference system. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45:15–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar