Umut PAMUKÇU, Meryem T. ALKURT, İLKAY PEKER

Lateral sefalometrik radyografide izlenen artifaktlar

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, lateral sefalometrik radyografi görüntülerinde izlenen artefaktların görülme sıklığını ve dağılımını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya 504 adet lateral sefalometrik radyografi görüntüsü dahil edildi. Görüntüler öncelikle artefakt mevcut olup olmamasına göre incelendi. İzlenen artefaktlar altı grupta sınıflandırıldı: (1) hastanın ağzı açık olması nedeniyle izlenen artefakt, (2) dudakların sıkıca kapalı olması nedeniyle izlenen artefakt, (3) hareket artefaktı, (4) yabancı cisim artefaktı, (5) transvers eksendeki ve (6), antero-posterior eksendeki rotasyona bağlı artefakt. Belirlenen artefaktların dağılımı tanımlayıcı istatistik ile hesaplandı. Bulgular: İncelenen tüm lateral sefalometrik radyografi görüntülerinde %31,3 (n=158) oranında artefakt belirlendi. En fazla transvers eksendeki rotasyona bağlı artefakt izlenirken (%64,5), en az oranda ise hareket artefaktı (%1,9) belirlendi. Sonuç: Çalışmanın sonuçları lateral sefalometrik görüntülerindeki artefakt oranının görece olarak yüksek olduğunu gösterdi. En fazla transvers eksendeki rotasyona bağlı artefaktlar izlendi.

Artefacts in lateral cephalometric radiography

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and distribution of artefacts on lateral cephalometric radiography images. Material and Methods: This study included 504 lateral cephalometric radiography images. The images were firstly examined whether artefacts were present or not. The observed artefacts were classified in six groups: (1) artefact observed due to the patient's mouth being open, (2) artefact due to tight lips (3) motion artefact (4) foreign body artefact, (5) artefact due to rotation in transvers plane (6), artefact due to rotation in antero-posterior plane. The distribution of the determined artefacts was calculated by descriptive statistics. Results: The artefact rate was determined as 31.3% (n = 158). The most frequent artefacts were artefact due to rotation in transvers plane (64.5%), the least frequent artefacts were motion artefact (1.9%). Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the artefact ratio was relatively high on lateral cephalometric images. The most frequent artefacts were the ones due to rotation in transvers plane.

PDF

___

1. White SC. Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology: principles and interrpretation. 7th Ed., St. Louis, Mosby, Elsevier; 2014.
2. Albarakati SF, Kula KS, Ghoneima AA. The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of conventional and digital methods. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 2012; 41(1): 11-17.
3. Devereux, L, Moles D, Cunningham SJ, McKnight M. How important are lateral cephalometric radiographs in orthodontic treatment planning? American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2011; 139 (2): e175-e181.
4. Nijkamp PG, Habets LL, Aartman IH, Zentner A. The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning. The European Journal of Orthodontics 2008; 30.6: 630-635.
5. Atchison KA, Luke LS, White SC. Contribution of pretreatment radiographs to orthodontists' decision making. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology 1991; 71(2): 238-245.
6. Harorlı A. Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi. İstanbul, Nobel Tıp Kitapevleri Tic. Ltd. Şti.; 2014.
7. Rino NJ, de Paiva JB, Queiroz GV, Attizzani MF, Miasiro Junior H. Evaluation of radiographic magnification in lateral cephalograms obtained with different X-ray devices: experimental study in human dry skull. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 2013; 18(2): 17-e1.
8. Gaddam R, Shashikumar HC, Lokesh NK, Suma T, Arya S, et al. Assessment of image distortion from head rotation in lateral cephalometry. Journal of International Oral Health: JIOH 2015; 7(6): 35.
9. Verma SK, Maheshwari S, Gautam SN, Prabhat K, Kumar S. "Natural head position: key position for radiographic and photographic analysis and research of craniofacial complex." Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 2012; 2(1): 46-49.
10. Moorrees CFA, Kean MR. Natural head position: a basic con- sideration in the interpretation of cephalometric radiographs. Am J Phys Anthropol 1958; 16: 213–34.
11. Molhave A. In: A Biostatic Investigation: the Standing Posture of Man Theoretically and Statometrically Illustrated. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard 1958; 291–300.
12. Cooke MS, Wei SHY. The reproducibility of natural head pos- ture: a methodological study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1988; 93: 280–8.
13. Dvortsin DP, Ye Q, Pruim GJ, Dijkstra PU, Ren Y. Reliability of the integrated radiograph-photograph method to obtain nat- ural head position in cephalometric diagnosis. Angle Orthod 2011; 81: 889–894.
14. Solow B, Tallgren A. Postural changes in cranio-cervical relationships. Tandlaegebladet. 1971; 75: 1247–1257.
15. Solow B, Tallgren A. Natural head position in standing subjects. Acta Odontol Scand. 1971; 29: 591– 607.
16. Cooke MS, Wei SH. The reproducibility of natural head posture: a methodological study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 93: 280–288.
17. Weems RA. Radiographic cephalometric technique. In: Jacobson A. Radiographic cephalometry from basics to video imaging. Carol Stream: Quintessence 1995; 39- 52.
18. Bergensen EO. Enlargement and distortion in cephalometric radiography: compensation tables for linear measurements. Angle Orthod 1980; 50(3): 230-244.
19. Showfety KJ, Vig PS, Matteson S. A simple method for taking natural-head-position cephalograms. American Journal of Orthodontics 1983; 83.6: 495-500.
20. Ahlqvist J, Eliasson S, Welander U. The effect of proje ction errors on cephalometric length measurements. The European Journal of Orthodontics 1986; 8.3: 141-148.
21. Yoon YJ, Kim KS, Hwang MS, Kim HJ, Choi EH, et al. Effect of head rotation on lateral cephalometric radiographs. The Angle Orthodontist 2001; 71.5: 396-403.
22. Berneburg M, Koos B, Kratochwil R, Godt A. Effects of head positioning on cephalometric measurements. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics/Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 2012; 73(6): 477-485.
23. Chadwick JW, Prentice RN, Major PW, Lam EW. Image distortion and magnification of 3 digital CCD cephalometric systems. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontics 2009; 107(1): 105-112.
24. Lee KH, Hwang HS, Curry S, Boyd RL, Norris K, et al. Effect of cephalometer misalignment on calculations of facial asymmetry. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2007; 132.1: 15-27.
25. Durão AR, Pittayapat P, Rockenbach MI, Olszewski R, Ng S, et al. Validity of 2D lateral cephalometry in orthodontics: a systematic review. Progress in Orthodontics 2013; 14.1: 31.
26. Olszewski R, Reychler H. Limitations of orthognathic model surgery: theoretical and practical implications. Revue de Stomatologie et de Chirurgie Maxillo-Faciale 2004; 105(3): 165-169.
27. Major PW, Johnson DE, Hesse KL, Glover KE. Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics. The Angle Orthodontist 1994; 64.6: 447-454.
28. Baumrind S, Robert CF. The reliability of head film measurements: 2. Conventional angular and linear measures. American journal of orthodontics 1971; 60(5): 505- 517.
29. Howard DS, Daniel ML. An artifact in mandibular position induced by the intrameatal cephalometric head holder. American Journal of Orthodontics 1971; 59(4): 338- 342.
30. Danforth RA, Dus I, Mah J. 3-D volume imaging for dentistry: a new dimension. Journal of the California Dental Association 2003; 31(11): 817-823.
31. Olszewski R. Three-dimensional computed tomography cephalometric craniofacial analysis: experimental validation in vitro. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2007; 36.9: 828-833.
32. Swennen GR, Schutyser F, Barth EL, De Groeve, De Mey A. A new method of 3-D cephalometry Part I: the anatomic Cartesian 3-D reference system. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 2006; 17(2): 314-325.
33. 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. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 2011; 40(8): 492-500.
34. Björk A, Björk L. Artificial deformation and cranio-facial asymmetry in ancient Peruvians. Journal of Dental Research 1964; 43(3): 353-362.
35. John P, Puri A, Ho-A-Yun J. A re-audit of the quality of digital lateral cephalometric radiographs. Orthodontic Update 2015; 8(1): 24-27.