American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2022
Using the anterior cranial base to provide a reliable reference plane for patients with or without facial asymmetry.
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.
Feng Bin, Yu Xiaowen, Wang Yang, Ouyang Wangtao, Wu Fuli, Yu Mengfei, Chen Qianming
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate the midsagittal reference plane (MSP) reliability derived from the 3-dimensional characteristics of patients with or without facial asymmetry in the anterior cranial base (ACB).
METHODS: We divided the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 60 adult patients into maxillofacial symmetry and asymmetry groups. The ACB models were 3-dimensionally constructed, and then symmetrical characteristics were evaluated with surface asymmetry for each group. The reliability of the MSP derived from the symmetry of the anterior cranial base (MSPACB) was assessed in comparison with the true craniofacial symmetry plane determined using the morphometric method.
RESULTS: The ACB was symmetrical, as demonstrated by slight surface asymmetry. The MSPACB was reliable for maxillofacial asymmetrical analysis as the intraobserver and interobserver measurements using the MSPACB were of excellent agreement, and there was no significant difference between MSPACB and morphometric method in asymmetrical measurements in both groups. The MSPACB remained stable (maximum deviation <0.32 mm) when cranial landmark identification errors (1 mm and 4 mm) were simulated.
CONCLUSIONS: MSPACB is reliable for patients with or without facial asymmetry in maxillofacial asymmetry analysis, which is beneficial to patients with severe midfacial asymmetry or trauma when conventional landmarks are displaced or disappear. When using MSPACB for patients with cranial malformations or those whose ACBs differ from normal dimensions, caution should be taken.
METHODS: We divided the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 60 adult patients into maxillofacial symmetry and asymmetry groups. The ACB models were 3-dimensionally constructed, and then symmetrical characteristics were evaluated with surface asymmetry for each group. The reliability of the MSP derived from the symmetry of the anterior cranial base (MSPACB) was assessed in comparison with the true craniofacial symmetry plane determined using the morphometric method.
RESULTS: The ACB was symmetrical, as demonstrated by slight surface asymmetry. The MSPACB was reliable for maxillofacial asymmetrical analysis as the intraobserver and interobserver measurements using the MSPACB were of excellent agreement, and there was no significant difference between MSPACB and morphometric method in asymmetrical measurements in both groups. The MSPACB remained stable (maximum deviation <0.32 mm) when cranial landmark identification errors (1 mm and 4 mm) were simulated.
CONCLUSIONS: MSPACB is reliable for patients with or without facial asymmetry in maxillofacial asymmetry analysis, which is beneficial to patients with severe midfacial asymmetry or trauma when conventional landmarks are displaced or disappear. When using MSPACB for patients with cranial malformations or those whose ACBs differ from normal dimensions, caution should be taken.