Accuracy and landmark error calculation using cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate systematic differences in landmark position between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms and to estimate how much variability should be taken into account when both modalities are used within the same longitudinal study.


METHODS
Landmarks on homologous cone-beam computed tomographic-generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms of 46 patients were digitized, registered, and compared via the Hotelling T(2) test.


RESULTS
There were no systematic differences between modalities in the position of most landmarks. Three landmarks showed statistically significant differences but did not reach clinical significance. A method for error calculation while combining both modalities in the same individual is presented.


CONCLUSIONS
In a longitudinal follow-up for assessment of treatment outcomes and growth of one individual, the error due to the combination of the two modalities might be larger than previously estimated.
Grauer
Dan
D
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7450, USA. grauerd@dentistry.unc.edu
Cevidanes
Lucia S H
LS
Styner
Martin A
MA
Heulfe
Inam
I
Harmon
Eric T
ET
Zhu
Hongtu
H
Proffit
William R
WR
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D015982:Bias; D002508:Cephalometry / Q000379:methods*; D054893:Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; D003951:Diagnostic Errors; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008875:Middle Aged; D056888:Patient Positioning; D019252:Radiography, Dental, Digital; D012016:Reference Values; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012886:Skull / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D055815:Young Adult