In the present study, CBCT-based cephalometry wasĪttempted on craniofacial hard tissues with the specialized Is no single CBCT measurement method that has been widely used in In CBCT data analysis has not been adapted widely. Furthermore, the third-party software used However, due to the complexity of the 3D data, this method has not Various oral and craniofacial diseases ( 7, 8). Increasingly popular in the diagnosis and treatment planning for Image accuracy and fewer misdiagnosis, and is particularly suitableįor hard tissue imaging ( 5, 6). Low radiation exposure of the patient, high scanning flexibility, CBCT is a relatively novel imaging method, with Of the applications of the 3D craniofacial structure imaging inĪt present, there are several commonly used 3DĬephalometric methods, including X-ray skull stereo imaging, 3D CT Technique has greatly improved and enhanced the breadth and depth

This method can be applied to patient specific types of Tomography (CBCT) for craniofacial cephalometry has become Of issues, such as image overlapping and landmark identification,Īchieved by positioning the patients body within a cone beam duringĬT scanning, thus leading to low clarity of the lateralĬephalograms for precision measurement ( 2– 4).Ĭomputer software and medical technology, 3D cone-beam computed Measurements based on radiation techniques are affected by a number Planning for orthodontic surgery and therapy. Orthodontia was first used by Broadbent in 1931 ( 1), and this technique has since evolvedįrom a manual to a computer-aided measurement ( 2, 3).Ĭephalometry is the foundation for the diagnosis, analysis and Two-dimensional (2D) X-ray cephalometry for In conclusion, CBCT may provide diagnostic and treatment information for maxillofacial deformities by using fast computer‑aided analysis platform. These findings indicated that CBCT is a more accurate technique compared with the conventional 2D method. The results indicated that the two methods showed significant differences in all 12 angle and 5 linear measurements (P<0.05). Measurements in the two images were performed twice using the Steiner and Tweed standards and a single analyzer paired t‑test was used to analyze the differences between the two cephalometric methods. The 3D CBCT cephalograms were reconstructed and measured with in vivo 5.1 software, and compared with the results from the conventional 2D lateral cephalograms. A total of 40 newly diagnosed orthodontic patients (including 18 males and 22 females age range, 12‑18 years) were subjected to CBCT scanning and X‑ray imaging in order to obtain lateral cephalograms. The present study was conducted to evaluate the three‑dimensional (3D) cephalometry accuracy of cone‑beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Anatomage in vivo viewer download