用于上呼吸道三维分析的成像软件准确性。

Imaging software accuracy for 3-dimensional analysis of the upper airway.

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012 Dec;142(6):801-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.07.015.

DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.07.015

PMID:23195366

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare the precision and accuracy of 6 imaging software programs for measuring upper airway volumes in cone-beam computed tomography data.

METHODS

The sample consisted of 33 growing patients and an oropharynx acrylic phantom, scanned with an i-CAT scanner (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, Pa). The known oropharynx acrylic phantom volume was used as the gold standard. Semi-automatic segmentations with interactive and fixed threshold protocols of the patients' oropharynx and oropharynx acrylic phantom were performed by using Mimics (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium), ITK-Snap (www.itksnap.org), OsiriX (Pixmeo, Geneva, Switzerland), Dolphin3D (Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif), InVivo Dental (Anatomage, San Jose, Calif), and Ondemand3D (CyberMed, Seoul, Korea) software programs. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used for the reliability tests. A repeated measurements analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and post-hoc tests (Bonferroni) were used to compare the software programs.

RESULTS

The reliability was high for all programs. With the interactive threshold protocol, the oropharynx acrylic phantom segmentations with Mimics, Dolphin3D, OsiriX, and ITK-Snap showed less than 2% errors in volumes compared with the gold standard. Ondemand3D and InVivo Dental had more than 5% errors compared with the gold standard. With the fixed threshold protocol, the volume errors were similar (-11.1% to -11.7%) among the programs. In the oropharynx segmentation with the interactive protocol, ITK-Snap, Mimics, OsiriX, and Dolphin3D were statistically significantly different (P <0.05) from InVivo Dental. No statistical difference (P >0.05) was found between InVivo Dental and OnDemand3D.

CONCLUSIONS

All 6 imaging software programs were reliable but had errors in the volume segmentations of the oropharynx. Mimics, Dolphin3D, ITK-Snap, and OsiriX were similar and more accurate than InVivo Dental and Ondemand3D for upper airway assessment.

摘要

介绍

本研究旨在比较 6 种影像软体程式在锥形束电脑断层扫描资料中测量上呼吸道容积的精确性和准确性。

方法

样本包括 33 名生长中的患者和一个口咽丙烯酸体模，使用 i-CAT 扫描仪（Imaging Sciences International，Hatfield，Pa）进行扫描。使用口咽丙烯酸体模的已知容积作为金标准。使用 Mimics（Materialise，Leuven，比利时）、ITK-Snap（www.itksnap.org）、OsiriX（Pixmeo，Geneva，瑞士）、Dolphin3D（Dolphin Imaging & Management Solutions，Chatsworth，Calif）、InVivo Dental（Anatomage，San Jose，Calif）和 Ondemand3D（CyberMed，Seoul，Korea）软体程式对患者的口咽和口咽丙烯酸体模进行半自动分割，采用互动和固定阈值方案。采用组内相关系数进行可靠性检验。采用重复测量方差分析（ANOVA）检验和事后检验（Bonferroni）比较软体程式。

结果

所有软体程式的可靠性均较高。采用互动式阈值方案时，与金标准相比，Mimics、Dolphin3D、OsiriX 和 ITK-Snap 对口咽丙烯酸体模的分割体积误差小于 2%。与金标准相比，Ondemand3D 和 InVivo Dental 的误差超过 5%。采用固定阈值方案时，各软体程式的体积误差相似（-11.1%至-11.7%）。在采用互动式方案对口咽进行分割时，ITK-Snap、Mimics、OsiriX 和 Dolphin3D 与 InVivo Dental 统计学上存在显著差异（P<0.05）。未发现 InVivo Dental 和 Ondemand3D 之间存在统计学差异（P>0.05）。