Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Validity and reproducibility of a tripoding method in point registration-based 3D superimposition software compared to a conventional cephalometric method Cover

Validity and reproducibility of a tripoding method in point registration-based 3D superimposition software compared to a conventional cephalometric method

Australasian Orthodontic Journal
Volume 38 (2022): Issue 2 (July 2022)
By: Nor Nadia Zakaria,  Wan Nurazreena Wan Hassan and  Yasmin Kamarudin  
Open Access
|Sep 2022

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Superimposition of the 3D study casts from lateral (above) and palatal (below) views. (a) Casts that were aligned using points on the anterior segment only, which comprised the medial two-third of the third palatal rugae, showed inconsistencies in the superimposition due to lack of pitch control. (b) Alignment of the casts using the tripoding method showed more consistent superimposition.
Superimposition of the 3D study casts from lateral (above) and palatal (below) views. (a) Casts that were aligned using points on the anterior segment only, which comprised the medial two-third of the third palatal rugae, showed inconsistencies in the superimposition due to lack of pitch control. (b) Alignment of the casts using the tripoding method showed more consistent superimposition.

Figure 2.

Point registration-based software. Identification of 6 landmarks on the medial two-third of the third palatal rugae of both pre-treatment (top) and post-treatment cast (bottom).
Point registration-based software. Identification of 6 landmarks on the medial two-third of the third palatal rugae of both pre-treatment (top) and post-treatment cast (bottom).

Figure 3.

The superimposition area. (a) The anterior reference points (shaded area). (b) The posterior reference points (two arrows).
The superimposition area. (a) The anterior reference points (shaded area). (b) The posterior reference points (two arrows).

Figure 4.

Pancherz analysis landmarks and reference line: is, incisal tip of the most prominent maxillary central incisor; ms, mesial contact point of the maxillary permanent first molar determined by a tangent perpendicular to OL; sp, spinal point of the maxilla jaw base, OL, a line through is and the distobuccal cusp maxillary first permanent molar; OLp, is a line perpendicular to OL through s(sella); NL, nasal line or maxillary plane. SO analysis reference (a): position of the maxillary jaw base (sp/OLp), position of the most prominent central incisor (is/OLp) and position of the left permanent first molar (ms/OLp). VO analysis reference (b): position of the maxillary central incisor to the maxillary plane, (is/NL) and position of the permanent first molar cusp to the nasal line, (msc/NL).
Pancherz analysis landmarks and reference line: is, incisal tip of the most prominent maxillary central incisor; ms, mesial contact point of the maxillary permanent first molar determined by a tangent perpendicular to OL; sp, spinal point of the maxilla jaw base, OL, a line through is and the distobuccal cusp maxillary first permanent molar; OLp, is a line perpendicular to OL through s(sella); NL, nasal line or maxillary plane. SO analysis reference (a): position of the maxillary jaw base (sp/OLp), position of the most prominent central incisor (is/OLp) and position of the left permanent first molar (ms/OLp). VO analysis reference (b): position of the maxillary central incisor to the maxillary plane, (is/NL) and position of the permanent first molar cusp to the nasal line, (msc/NL).

Figure 5.

Bland-Altman plots for horizontal and vertical distance of the central incisor and first molar using two methods.
Bland-Altman plots for horizontal and vertical distance of the central incisor and first molar using two methods.

Data analysis for incisor and molar movements measured from 3D models and cephalometric radiographs, each on two separate occasions (in mm)_

Intraclass correlation (ICC)Paired t test
Tooth movementMeasurement method95% CIICCp-valueMean (SD)Standard Error mean95% CI of differencet-stat (df)p-value
Incisor Horizontal3D(0.88, 0.97)0.94<0.0010.02 (0.65)0.11(-0.23,0.26)0.13 (29)0.90
Ceph(0.67, 0.91)0.83<0.0010.01 (1.50)0.27(-0.55,0.57)0.05 (29)0.96
Incisor Vertical3D(0.89, 0.97)0.95<0.001-0.06 (0.48)0.09(-0.24,0.12)-0.68 (29)0.50
Ceph(0.69, 0.92)0.84<0.0010.23 (0.93)0.17(-0.12,0.58)1.33 (29)0.19
Molar Horizontal3D(0.89, 0.97)0.94<0.0010.13 (0.46)0.08(-0.04,0.30)1.56 (29)0.13
Ceph(0.63, 0.90)0.81<0.0010.18 (1.18)0.21(-0.26,0.62)0.82 (29)0.42
Molar Vertical3D(0.86, 0.97)0.93<0.001-0.03 (0.33)0.60(-0.16,0.09)-0.56 (29)0.58
Ceph(0.76, 0.94)0.88<0.001-0.05 (0.87)0.16(-0.37,0.28)-0.31 (29)0.76

Bland-Altman analysis and paired t tests comparing horizontal and vertical tooth movement from 3D and cephalometric superimpositions_

Paired t test Bland–Altman
Tooth movementMean (SD)Standard Error mean95% CI of differencet (df)p-valueMean difference (SD)Lower LimitUpper limit
Incisor horizontal
 3D Ceph0.41 (1.30)0.24(-0.07,0.89)1.72 (29)0.0960.41 (1.30)-2.142.95
Incisor vertical
 3D Ceph -0.51 (1.90)0.35(-1.21,0.20)-1.46 (29)0.156-0.51 (1.90)-4.233.22
Molar horizontal
 3D Ceph 0.10 (1.54)0.28(-0.47,0.68)0.37 (29)0.7120.10 (1.54)-2.913.13
Molar vertical
 3D Ceph 0.03 (1.35)0.25(-0.48,0.53)0.11 (29)0.9160.03 (1.35)-2.622.67
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2022-0030 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 281 - 289
Submitted on: Feb 1, 2022
|
Accepted on: Jul 1, 2022
|
Published on: Sep 6, 2022
Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Basic medical science,
Basic medical science, other

© 2022 Nor Nadia Zakaria, Wan Nurazreena Wan Hassan, Yasmin Kamarudin, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 38 (2022): Issue 2 (July 2022)