Cone-beam computed tomography transverse analyses. Part 2: Measures of performance.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the predictability of the cone-beam transverse (CBT), jugale (J-point), and transpalatal width measurement (TWM) analyses in identifying clinical crossbite. METHODS: From a pool of patients with cone-beam computed tomography scans who came for orthodontic treatment, a sample of 133 patients was identified, with 54 in posterior crossbite (28 boys, 26 girls) and 79 not in crossbite (77 boys, 110 girls). No patient had dental compensation in this sample. After correcting for lateral mandibular shift, 33 of the 54 posterior crossbite patients had a bilateral crossbite, and 21 had a unilateral crossbite with no shift. The CBT, J-point, and TWM analyses were done for each patient from a coronal cross-section through the middle of both the maxillary and mandibular first molar crowns. The landmarks and measurements used were described in detail in a previous study. Posteroanterior cephalograms were constructed to simulate the geometry of the conventional cephalometric radiographs. All 3 analyses were performed on the same data set to predict whether crossbite was present. We used 2 assessments of diagnostic predictability: sensitivity and specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. While the 2 methods answer different questions, the prevalence of crossbite in a population will affect the positive and negative predictive values, but the sensitivity and specificity will not change. RESULTS: Of the 133 patients studied, 54 had a clinical crossbite, and 79 had no crossbite. The J-point analysis accurately predicted that 38 patients would have a crossbite, and 45 would not. This resulted in a positive predictive value of 52.78%, a negative predictive value of 73.77%, sensitivity of 70.4%, and specificity of 57%. The TWM analysis accurately predicted that 53 patients would have a crossbite, but it falsely predicted that an additional 68 patients would have crossbite. This resulted in a positive predictive value of 43.8%, a negative predictive value of 91.67%, sensitivity of 98.1%, and specificity of 13.9%. The CBT analysis correctly predicted a crossbite in 47 patients and accurately predicted no crossbite in 73 patients. This resulted in a positive predictive value of 88.68%, a negative predictive value of 91.25%, sensitivity of 87.0%, and specificity of 92.4%. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that although the TWM analysis had slightly better negative predictive and sensitivity values, the CBT analysis was overall better at both predictive value and sensitivity/specificity because of the limitations in J-point landmarks and the extent of the TWM analysis. Furthermore, the CBT analysis can distinguish between skeletal and dental discrepancies. Further work will test the analysis on additional samples with differing prevalences of crossbite.

Quantification of skeletal asymmetries in normal adolescents: cone-beam computed tomography analysis.

BACKGROUND: The detection and quantification of skeletal asymmetries is a fundamental component to diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics. The purpose of this study was to identify and quantify the characteristics of facial and dental asymmetries in a normal, adolescent population using 3D imaging. METHODS: Thirty consecutive Class I patients (mean age 14.32 years, SD 1.67) meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed by three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Dental, maxillary, mandibular, and cranial base variables were measured with Dolphin 3D. CBCT analysis consisted of the localization of 34 anatomical landmarks. All reference points were digitized in 3D and analyzed using 67 skeletal and dental measurements. Student's t tests for paired samples were used with a significance level of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Minor right-left discrepancies were noted in all planes. The most anterior point of the glenoid fossa and most condylar points were positioned more superior and lateral on the right side, compared to the left side. Porion was also located more superiorly on the right side relative to the left side. The posterior nasal spine was found to be located to the right of the midsagittal plane. Slight dental midline discrepancies were found, and the dental arch lengths were slightly longer on the left side compared to the right. The height of the ramus, in both 3D and 2D, and the inclination of the ramus were greater on the right than that on the left side. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest minor asymmetries exist and are likely a common occurrence in the normal human craniofacial complex. Additionally, a natural compensatory mechanism may exist which controls the size and shape of specific tissues in order to maintain functional symmetry.

Cone-beam computed tomography transverse analysis. Part I: Normative data.

INTRODUCTION: The application of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in orthodontics ushered in a new era in 3-dimensional analysis that promises to provide more comprehensive understanding of craniofacial skeletal anatomy. That promise is now being realized in multiple studies. The purposes of this study were to investigate a portion of transverse dimension relationships by using CBCT and to propose a transverse analysis to assist practitioners with treatment decisions. METHODS: The CBCT scans of 241 patients with and without crossbite were analyzed to assess the width of the jaws and the inclination of the first molars. The dental and skeletal measurements were compared between the noncrossbite and the crossbite groups. RESULTS: The noncrossbite group included patients who had apparently normal transverse relationships, but also a surprising number of patients with an obvious skeletal transverse discrepancy masked by dental compensation. The noncrossbite patients with molar inclinations within 1 SD of the mean were defined as the control group, and those with dental compensations were identified as either superior convergent or inferior convergent. The obvious unilateral crossbite patients demonstrated dental compensation in the maxillary first molar on the noncrossbite side, whereas the obvious bilateral crossbite patients had normal dental inclinations. CONCLUSIONS: Skeletally, both the bilateral and unilateral crossbite groups had narrower maxillary widths than did the controls, but also wider mandibles, with more severe bilateral crossbites. Dentally, the unilateral crossbite group had more upright teeth on the noncrossbite side. In the noncrossbite groups with dental compensations, the superior convergent and inferior convergent differences in both dental and skeletal characteristics were marked. Patients without crossbites can have significant discrepancies that might warrant treatment.

Skeletal and dental asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusions using cone-beam computed tomography.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to compare the degrees of skeletal and dental asymmetry between subjects with Class II subdivision malocclusions and subjects with normal occlusions by using cone-beam computed tomography. METHODS: Thirty subjects with Angle Class II subdivision malocclusions (mean age, 13.99 years) and 30 subjects with normal occlusions (mean age, 14.32 years) were assessed with 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography scans. Independent t tests were used to compare orthogonal, linear, and angular measurements between sides and between groups. RESULTS: Total mandibular length and ramus height were shorter on the Class II side. Pogonion, menton, and the mandibular dental midline were deviated toward the Class II side. Gonion and the anterior condyle landmark were positioned more posteriorly on the Class II side. The mandibular dental landmarks were located more latero-postero-superiorly, and the maxillary dental landmarks more latero-antero-superiorly on the Class II side. There was loss of maxillary arch length, and the mandibular molar was closer to the ramus on the Class II side. CONCLUSIONS: The etiology of Class II subdivision malocclusions is primarily due to an asymmetric mandible that is shorter and positioned posteriorly on the Class II side. A mesially positioned maxillary molar and a distally positioned mandibular molar on the Class II side are also minor contributing factors.

Accuracy of reconstructed images from cone-beam computed tomography scans.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine whether 2-dimensional (2D) images produced from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images taken with an iCAT scanner (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, Pa) can substitute for traditional cephalograms. METHODS: Lateral and frontal cephalograms were taken of a radiographic phantom with known dimensions. Landmarks on the 2D images were traced and measured manually by 2 examiners and then digitally in Dolphin 10 (Dolphin Imaging Sciences, Chatsworth, Calif) by the same examiners. A CBCT scan was taken of the phantom, and orthogonal and perspective projections were created from the scans. Frontal and lateral cephalograms were created by using the 3-dimensional function in Dolphin 10, digitized into Dolphin, and traced by the same 2 examiners. Linear measurements were compared to assess the accuracy of the generated images from the CBCT scans. RESULTS: Measurements on the orthogonal projections were not significantly different from the actual dimensions of the phantom, and measurements on the perspective projections were highly correlated with those taken on standard 2D films. CONCLUSIONS: By constructing a perspective lateral cephalogram from a CBCT scan, one can replicate the inherent magnification of a conventional 2D lateral cephalogram with high accuracy.

Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and reliability of 3-dimensional craniofacial measurements obtained from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of a dry human skull. METHODS: Seventeen landmarks were identified on the skull. CBCT scans were then obtained, with 2 skull orientations during scanning. Twenty-nine interlandmark linear measurements were made directly on the skull and compared with the same measurements made on the CBCT scans. All measurements were made by 2 operators on 4 separate occasions. RESULTS: The method errors were 0.19, 0.21, and 0.19 mm in the x-, y- and z-axes, respectively. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed no significant intraoperator or interoperator differences. The mean measurement error was -0.01 mm (SD, 0.129 mm). Five measurement errors were found to be statistically significantly different; however, all measurement errors were below the known voxel size and clinically insignificant. No differences were found in the measurements from the 2 CBCT scan orientations of the skull. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT allows for clinically accurate and reliable 3-dimensional linear measurements of the craniofacial complex. Moreover, skull orientation during CBCT scanning does not affect the accuracy or the reliability of these measurements.