Bartu ALTUĞ, Elif DEMİREL, Prof. Dr. Erhan ÖZDİLER

POSTEROANTERİOR RADYOGRAFİ ÖLÇÜMLERİNDE KULLANILAN NOKTALARIN TEKRARLANABİLİRLİĞİ

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, posteroanterior radyografilerde kullanılan anatomik ve dişsel noktaların tekrarlanabilirliğini bilgisayar programı ile belirlemektir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada kullanılan röntgenler Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Anabilim dalından alınmıştır. Röntgenler Ankara Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Anabilimdalında Dolphin 3D sefalometrik analiz programı ile ölçülmüştür filmlerde belirlenen 22 nokta 3 araştırmacı tarafından tekrarlanabilirliği test edilmiştir.Bulgular: Çalışmanın sonucuna göre iskeletsel noktalar dişsel noktalara göre daha güvenilirdir. En az güvenilir iskeletsel nokta zigomatiko-frontal sutur iken mandibular kanin en güvenilir dental noktadır. Sonuç: Çalışmada ayrıca iki düzlem değerlendirilmiş ve beklenmedik şekilde okluzal düzlem midsagittal düzleme göre daha güvenilir bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

posteroanterior radyografi, oklüzal düzlem, sefalometrik analiz

Repeatability of the Points Used in Posteroanterior Radiography Measurements

Aim: The aim of this study is to determine the repeatability of anatomical and dental points used in posteroanterior radiographs with a computer program.Materials and method: X-rays used in the study were taken from the Kirikkale University, Department of Dentistry. X-rays were measured with Dolphin 3D cephalometric analysis program at Ankara University Faculty of Dentistry, and the repeatability of the 22 points de-termined on the films was tested by 3 researchers.Results: According to the results of the study, skeletal points are more reliable than dental points. The least reliable skeletal point is the zygomatico-frontal suture, while the mandibu-lar canine is the most reliable dental point. Conclusion: In the study, two planes were also evaluated and unexpectedly, it is more reli-able in the occlusal plane compared to the midsagittal plane.

Keywords:

posteroanterior radiography, occlusal plane, cephalometric analysis,

PDF

___

1. Ricketts RM, Bench R, Hilgers J, Schulhof R. An overview of computerized cephalometrics. Am J Orthod 1972; 61: 1–28
2. Grummons DC, Kappeyne van de Coppello MA. Frontal asymmetry analysis. J Clin Orthod 1987; 21: 448–465
3. SNODELL SF, NANDA RS, CURRIER GF. A longitudinal cephalometric study of transverse and vertical craniofacial growth. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics,1993; 104, 471-483
4. ATHANASIOU AE. Orthodontic cephalometry. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1997; 111, 458-458
5. Grayson BH, McCarthy JG, Bookstein F. Analysis of craniofacial asymmetry by multiplane cephalometry. Am J Orthod 1983; 84: 217-224
6. EL-MANGOURY NH, SHAHEEN SI, MOSTAFA YA. Landmark identification in computerized posteroanterior cephalometrics. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1987; 91, 57-61.
7. GHAFARI J, CATER PE, SHOFER FS. Effect of film-object distance on posteroanterior cephalometric measurements: suggestions for standardized cephalometric methods. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1995; 108, 30-37
8. MAJOR PW, JOHNSON DE, HESSE KL, GLOVER KE. Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics. The Angle Orthodontist, 1994; 64, 447-454
9. ATHANASIOU A, MIETHKE R, VAN DER MEIJ A. Random errors in localization of landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms. Journal of Orthodontics, 1999; 26, 273-284
10.LEONARDI R, ANNUNZIATA A, CALTABIANO M. Landmark Identification Error in Posteroanterior Cephalometric Radiography: A Systematic Review. The Angle Orthodontist, 2008; 78, 761-765
11.YOON Y-J, KIM D-H, YU P-S, KIM H-J, CHOI E-H, KIM K-W. Effect of head rotation on posteroanterior cephalometric radiographs. The Angle orthodontist, 2002; 72, 36-42
12.VAN VLIJMEN O, BERGÉ S, BRONKHORST E, SWENNEN G, KATSAROS C, KUIJPERS-JAGTMAN A. A comparison of frontal radiographs obtained from cone beam CT scans and conventional frontal radiographs of human skulls. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2009; 38, 773-778.
13.RICKETTS R.M. Perspectives on the clinical application of cephalometrics. Angle Orthod 1981; 51: 115-150
14.RUDOLPH D.J., SINCLAIR P.M., COGGINS J.M. Automatic computerized radiographic identification of cephalometric landmarks. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113: 173-179
15.R Leonardia; A Annunziatab; M Caltabianoc. Landmark Identification Error in Posteroanterior Cephalometric Radiography. Angle Orthodontist 2008; 78, No 4
16.GRAVELY J.F., BENZIES R.M. The clinical significance of tracing error in cephalometry. Br J Orthod 1974; 1: 95-101.
17.AHLQVIST J., ELIASSON S., WELANDER U. The effect of projection errors on cephalometric length measurements. Eur J Orthod 1986; 8: 141-148.
18.BAUMRIND S., FRANTZ R.C. The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod 1971; 60: 111-127.
19.FORSYTH D.B., SHAW W.C., RICHMOND S., ROBERTS C.J. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs , part 2: image quality. Angle Orthod, 1996; 66: 43-50
20.FORSYTH D.B., SHAW W.C., RICHMOND S. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiography, part 1: Advantages and limitations of digital imaging. Angle Orthod, 1996; 66: 37-42