Head & face medicine · 2025
Influence of patient motion on definition of typical cephalometric reference points in digital horizontally scanning cephalometric radiography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martin Kim, Katsaros Christos, Brylka Robert, Schwanecke Ulrich, Schulze Ralf
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of defined head-motion during x-ray exposure on the identification accuracy of typical cephalometric reference points.
METHODS: By means of a dry adult human skull and a precise motion simulation system digital Cephs are acquired while certain predefined movement patterns (shift, tilt and nodding with a motion amplitude from 5 - 50 mm) of the skull were executed. They represent the movements of children and adolescents, the main group for cephalometric radiographs.The scanning time was 9.4 s per Ceph. 10 typical landmark points of cephalometric analysis were identified by 20 observers on each Ceph twice. Using a non-motion image (Ceph0) as reference, displacement was computed as vectors relative to this image. Commonly used angles and vertical and horizontal distances were calculated.
RESULTS: Both inter-rater as well as intra-rater-reproducibility were perfect. There was very little change in the vertical distance N-Me, in contrast to the horizontal distance S-N which showed a large variation. So patient motion parallel to the scanning direction of the fan-beam-detector unit, heavily influence distances parallel to this direction. The ANB angle and the Maxillo-Mandibular Plane Angle (ANS-PNS to Me-Go) only varied by about 1-2°.
CONCLUSIONS: The study observed a severe influence on reference point location of motion patterns parallel to the scanning direction and also on clinically relevant distances parallel to the scanning direction. Therefore, we recommend to use a horizontal scanning direction, to minimise scanning time to a minimum, or to prefer a one-shot technique if possible. Future advancements in this field may include the integration of artificial intelligence or algorithms for the purpose of motion correction.
METHODS: By means of a dry adult human skull and a precise motion simulation system digital Cephs are acquired while certain predefined movement patterns (shift, tilt and nodding with a motion amplitude from 5 - 50 mm) of the skull were executed. They represent the movements of children and adolescents, the main group for cephalometric radiographs.The scanning time was 9.4 s per Ceph. 10 typical landmark points of cephalometric analysis were identified by 20 observers on each Ceph twice. Using a non-motion image (Ceph0) as reference, displacement was computed as vectors relative to this image. Commonly used angles and vertical and horizontal distances were calculated.
RESULTS: Both inter-rater as well as intra-rater-reproducibility were perfect. There was very little change in the vertical distance N-Me, in contrast to the horizontal distance S-N which showed a large variation. So patient motion parallel to the scanning direction of the fan-beam-detector unit, heavily influence distances parallel to this direction. The ANB angle and the Maxillo-Mandibular Plane Angle (ANS-PNS to Me-Go) only varied by about 1-2°.
CONCLUSIONS: The study observed a severe influence on reference point location of motion patterns parallel to the scanning direction and also on clinically relevant distances parallel to the scanning direction. Therefore, we recommend to use a horizontal scanning direction, to minimise scanning time to a minimum, or to prefer a one-shot technique if possible. Future advancements in this field may include the integration of artificial intelligence or algorithms for the purpose of motion correction.