McIntyre Grant T, Mossey Peter A
Orthodontic Department, University of Dundee Dental School, UK.
Eur J Orthod. 2003 Jun;25(3):231-42. doi: 10.1093/ejo/25.3.231.
The traditional method of analysing cephalograms--conventional cephalometric analysis (CCA)--involves the calculation of linear distance measurements, angular measurements, area measurements, and ratios. Because shape information cannot be determined from these 'size-based' measurements, an increasing number of studies employ geometric morphometric tools in the cephalometric analysis of craniofacial morphology. Most of the discussions surrounding the appropriateness of CCA, Procrustes superimposition, Euclidean distance matrix analysis (EDMA), thin-plate spline analysis (TPS), finite element morphometry (FEM), elliptical Fourier functions (EFF), and medial axis analysis (MAA) have centred upon mathematical and statistical arguments. Surprisingly, little information is available to assist the orthodontist in the clinical relevance of each technique. This article evaluates the advantages and limitations of the above methods currently used to analyse the craniofacial morphology on cephalograms and investigates their clinical relevance and possible applications.
分析头影测量片的传统方法——传统头影测量分析(CCA)——涉及线性距离测量、角度测量、面积测量和比率计算。由于无法从这些“基于尺寸”的测量中确定形状信息,越来越多的研究在颅面形态的头影测量分析中采用几何形态测量工具。围绕CCA、普洛透斯叠加、欧几里得距离矩阵分析(EDMA)、薄板样条分析(TPS)、有限元形态测量(FEM)、椭圆傅里叶函数(EFF)和中轴线分析(MAA)的适用性的大多数讨论都集中在数学和统计学论据上。令人惊讶的是,几乎没有信息可帮助正畸医生了解每种技术的临床相关性。本文评估了目前用于分析头影测量片上颅面形态的上述方法的优缺点,并研究了它们的临床相关性和可能的应用。