American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2014
Three-dimensional cephalometric superimposition of the nasomaxillary complex.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Lemieux Genevieve, Carey Jason P, Flores-Mir Carlos, Secanell Marc, Hart Adam, Dietrich Nicholas, Lagravère-Vich Manuel O
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Two-dimensional maxillary superimposition techniques have been routinely used in clinical practice, but a 3-dimensional plane has yet to be introduced and validated. The purposes of this study were to propose a new plane for regional superimposition of the maxillary complex and then to validate it through clinical data.
METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment palatal expansion records were used. The magnitudes of the transverse expansion at the levels of the first premolars and the first molars were assessed using the proposed superimposition plane and then were compared with the gold standard plaster model measurements. Descriptive statistics and agreement testing were performed to compare the methods.
RESULTS: When comparing the superimposition and plaster measurement methods, the mean errors for intermolar and interpremolar distances were 0.57 and 0.59 mm, respectively. Both the intraclass correlation coefficient and the Bland-Altman plot demonstrated high agreement between the 2 methods (intraclass correlation coefficient greater than 0.9).
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed maxillary superimposition plane yields clinically suitable results when compared with the gold standard technique, with a mean error of less than 0.6 mm for typical intra-arch measurements. This new landmark-derived maxillary plane for superimposition is a promising tool for evaluating maxillary dentoalveolar changes after treatment.
METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment palatal expansion records were used. The magnitudes of the transverse expansion at the levels of the first premolars and the first molars were assessed using the proposed superimposition plane and then were compared with the gold standard plaster model measurements. Descriptive statistics and agreement testing were performed to compare the methods.
RESULTS: When comparing the superimposition and plaster measurement methods, the mean errors for intermolar and interpremolar distances were 0.57 and 0.59 mm, respectively. Both the intraclass correlation coefficient and the Bland-Altman plot demonstrated high agreement between the 2 methods (intraclass correlation coefficient greater than 0.9).
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed maxillary superimposition plane yields clinically suitable results when compared with the gold standard technique, with a mean error of less than 0.6 mm for typical intra-arch measurements. This new landmark-derived maxillary plane for superimposition is a promising tool for evaluating maxillary dentoalveolar changes after treatment.