Manosudprasit Amornrut, Haghi Arshan, Allareddy Veerasathpurush, Masoud Mohamed I
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston University, Boston, Mass.
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston University, Boston, Mass.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Jun;151(6):1083-1091. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.037.
Cephalometrics has been the foundation of orthodontic diagnosis for many years. However, for many orthodontic patients, a lateral cephalogram might not be necessary. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnosis and treatment planning agreement between standard records and nonradiographic 3-dimensional (3D) dentofacial photogrammetry records.
Twenty patients had standard orthodontic records taken for their treatment as well as extraoral and intraoral 3D images. Twelve evaluators examined the standard records and then completed diagnosis and treatment planning questionnaires. They repeated the process 4 to 6 weeks later by using 3D photographic images along with the panoramic radiographs. Each evaluator also evaluated 2 random orthodontic cases twice with each method to evaluate consistency within each method. At the end of study, each evaluator was asked to complete a survey to document his or her experiences with the 3D photogrammetry method. Descriptive and kappa statistics were used to determine the agreement.
Most diagnosis parameters had fair agreement between the methods and within each method. Skeletal and dental relationships had excellent agreement between and within the methods as well as most treatment decisions such as the need for extractions and surgery. Most evaluators (91.7%) thought that cephalometric x-rays would be needed only some of the time in diagnosis and treatment planning. Most evaluators (83.33%) thought that cephalometric radiographs are not needed in patients with a Class I ± a quarter cusp with crowding or spacing.
Most diagnostic decisions had fair agreement within and between the 2 methods. The decision to extract and the need for orthognathic surgery had excellent agreement between the cephalometric and photogrammetric methods. The majority of examiners agreed that patients with Class I malocclusions ± a quarter cusp with no obvious skeletal discrepancy can be diagnosed and planned without a cephalometric radiograph.
多年来,头影测量一直是正畸诊断的基础。然而,对于许多正畸患者来说,可能并不需要拍摄头颅侧位片。本研究的目的是比较标准记录与非放射学三维(3D)牙颌面摄影测量记录之间的诊断和治疗计划一致性。
20名患者接受了用于治疗的标准正畸记录以及口外和口内3D图像采集。12名评估者检查标准记录,然后完成诊断和治疗计划问卷。4至6周后,他们使用3D摄影图像和全景X线片重复该过程。每位评估者还使用每种方法对2例随机正畸病例进行两次评估,以评估每种方法内部的一致性。在研究结束时,要求每位评估者完成一项调查,记录其使用3D摄影测量方法的体验。采用描述性统计和kappa统计来确定一致性。
大多数诊断参数在两种方法之间以及每种方法内部的一致性一般。骨骼和牙齿关系在两种方法之间以及每种方法内部的一致性良好,大多数治疗决策(如拔牙和手术的必要性)也是如此。大多数评估者(91.7%)认为在诊断和治疗计划中仅在某些时候需要头影测量X线片。大多数评估者(83.33%)认为对于I类±四分之一个牙尖伴有拥挤或牙列间隙的患者不需要拍摄头影测量X线片。
大多数诊断决策在两种方法之间以及每种方法内部的一致性一般。拔牙决策和正颌手术的必要性在头影测量法和摄影测量法之间的一致性良好。大多数检查者一致认为,对于没有明显骨骼差异的I类错牙合±四分之一个牙尖的患者,可以在不拍摄头影测量X线片的情况下进行诊断和制定治疗计划。