Suppr超能文献

气道容量是否得到正确分析?

Is the airway volume being correctly analyzed?

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012 May;141(5):657-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.11.019.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to determine the most accurate threshold value for airway volume quantification based on specific experimental conditions.

METHODS

Ten scans from the airway prototype were obtained by using cone-beam computed tomography. The volume from each scan was measured with 8 values (25, 50, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, and 75) of the threshold tool from the Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging and Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif). The gold standard method used was the actual volume of the airway prototype, which was compared with the different threshold values. An intraclass correlation coefficient test was applied to evaluate the intraexaminer calibration and verify differences among the airway volumes measured in all cone-beam computed tomography scans. Analysis of variance with the Tukey post-hoc test was used to compare differences among the measurements with different threshold values with the gold standard.

RESULTS

The intraexaminer reliability was confirmed by the intraclass correlation coefficient, which was ≥0.99. The intraclass correlation coefficient used to verify the differences among the airway volume measurements in all cone-beam computed tomography scans was ≥0.98, showing that they were comparable. Analysis of variance and the Tukey post-hoc test showed that the volumes measured with the threshold values of the 25 and 50 filters had statistically significant differences from the gold standard. However, volumes measured with the threshold values of the 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, and 75 showed no statistically significant differences from the gold standard and among them.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study for the cone-beam machine and the acquisition parameters used, the threshold value of the 73 used in Dolphin 3D software was the most accurate to measure airway volume, but the threshold values of the 70, 71, 72, 74, and 75 had no statistically significant differences compared with the gold standard, showing they are also reliable.

摘要

简介

本研究旨在确定基于特定实验条件的气道容积定量最准确的阈值。

方法

使用锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)获取气道原型的 10 个扫描。使用 Dolphin 软件(加利福尼亚州查茨沃思的 Dolphin Imaging and Management Solutions)的阈值工具的 8 个值(25、50、70、71、72、73、74 和 75)测量每个扫描的体积。金标准方法是气道原型的实际体积,将其与不同的阈值进行比较。应用组内相关系数检验评估内检者校准,并验证所有 CBCT 扫描中测量的气道容积之间的差异。方差分析和 Tukey 事后检验用于比较不同阈值与金标准测量值之间的差异。

结果

组内相关系数证实了内检者的可靠性,大于或等于 0.99。用于验证所有 CBCT 扫描中气道容积测量之间差异的组内相关系数大于或等于 0.98,表明它们具有可比性。方差分析和 Tukey 事后检验显示,使用 25 和 50 滤波器的阈值测量的体积与金标准有统计学显著差异。然而,使用 70、71、72、73、74 和 75 阈值测量的体积与金标准和彼此之间没有统计学显著差异。

结论

在我们针对 CBCT 机器和使用的采集参数的研究中,Dolphin 3D 软件中使用的 73 阈值是测量气道容积最准确的,但与金标准相比,70、71、72、74 和 75 的阈值没有统计学显著差异,表明它们也是可靠的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验