American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2018
Reliability and validity of mandibular posterior vertical asymmetry index in panoramic radiography compared with cone-beam computed tomography.
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.
Lim Young-Sub, Chung Dong-Hwa, Lee Jin-Woo, Lee Sang-Min
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to compare the asymmetry index using panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for detecting mandibular posterior asymmetry and to evaluate the diagnostic value of the asymmetry index on panoramic radiography.
METHODS: A total of 43 patients were included in this study. Ten mandibular posterior distances were measured using panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography, and 10 asymmetry index values were calculated. The reliability of each asymmetry index was assessed. For evaluating validity of each asymmetry index using panoramic radiography, the paired t test and the Bland-Altman analysis were used. The accuracy of the asymmetry index and the area under the curve of receiver operator characteristic were calculated.
RESULTS: The asymmetry index of total ramal height showed good reliability (ICC, >0.888). In condylar height 1, specificity and negative predictive value were low (0.08 and 0.17, respectively), 95% limits of agreement were ±17.9%, and area under the curve was 0.484. In total, ramal height accuracy was 0.86, and areas under the curve were 0.926 to 0.957.
CONCLUSIONS: For detecting asymmetry of the condyle region, the asymmetry index using panoramic radiography had little diagnostic value, and we recommend using cone-beam computed tomography images. However, the asymmetry index for total ramal height showed good reliability and relatively higher validity, and its diagnostic value was excellent.
METHODS: A total of 43 patients were included in this study. Ten mandibular posterior distances were measured using panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography, and 10 asymmetry index values were calculated. The reliability of each asymmetry index was assessed. For evaluating validity of each asymmetry index using panoramic radiography, the paired t test and the Bland-Altman analysis were used. The accuracy of the asymmetry index and the area under the curve of receiver operator characteristic were calculated.
RESULTS: The asymmetry index of total ramal height showed good reliability (ICC, >0.888). In condylar height 1, specificity and negative predictive value were low (0.08 and 0.17, respectively), 95% limits of agreement were ±17.9%, and area under the curve was 0.484. In total, ramal height accuracy was 0.86, and areas under the curve were 0.926 to 0.957.
CONCLUSIONS: For detecting asymmetry of the condyle region, the asymmetry index using panoramic radiography had little diagnostic value, and we recommend using cone-beam computed tomography images. However, the asymmetry index for total ramal height showed good reliability and relatively higher validity, and its diagnostic value was excellent.