Cargando…

A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry

Morphometric methods are used in biology to study object symmetry in living organisms and to determine the true plane of symmetry. The aim of this study was to determine if there are clinical differences between three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric midsagittal planes used to describe craniofacial as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Damstra, Janalt, Fourie, Zacharias, De Wit, Marnix, Ren, Yijin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259389/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21271348
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0512-4
_version_ 1782221378505670656
author Damstra, Janalt
Fourie, Zacharias
De Wit, Marnix
Ren, Yijin
author_facet Damstra, Janalt
Fourie, Zacharias
De Wit, Marnix
Ren, Yijin
author_sort Damstra, Janalt
collection PubMed
description Morphometric methods are used in biology to study object symmetry in living organisms and to determine the true plane of symmetry. The aim of this study was to determine if there are clinical differences between three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric midsagittal planes used to describe craniofacial asymmetry and a true symmetry plane derived from a morphometric method based on visible facial features. The sample consisted of 14 dry skulls (9 symmetric and 5 asymmetric) with metallic markers which were imaged with cone-beam computed tomography. An error study and statistical analysis were performed to validate the morphometric method. The morphometric and conventional cephalometric planes were constructed and compared. The 3D cephalometric planes constructed as perpendiculars to the Frankfort horizontal plane resembled the morphometric plane the most in both the symmetric and asymmetric groups with mean differences of less than 1.00 mm for most variables. However, the standard deviations were often large and clinically significant for these variables. There were clinically relevant differences (>1.00 mm) between the different 3D cephalometric midsagittal planes and the true plane of symmetry determined by the visible facial features. The difference between 3D cephalometric midsagittal planes and the true plane of symmetry determined by the visible facial features were clinically relevant. Care has to be taken using cephalometric midsagittal planes for diagnosis and treatment planning of craniofacial asymmetry as they might differ from the true plane of symmetry as determined by morphometrics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3259389
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32593892012-01-31 A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry Damstra, Janalt Fourie, Zacharias De Wit, Marnix Ren, Yijin Clin Oral Investig Original Article Morphometric methods are used in biology to study object symmetry in living organisms and to determine the true plane of symmetry. The aim of this study was to determine if there are clinical differences between three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric midsagittal planes used to describe craniofacial asymmetry and a true symmetry plane derived from a morphometric method based on visible facial features. The sample consisted of 14 dry skulls (9 symmetric and 5 asymmetric) with metallic markers which were imaged with cone-beam computed tomography. An error study and statistical analysis were performed to validate the morphometric method. The morphometric and conventional cephalometric planes were constructed and compared. The 3D cephalometric planes constructed as perpendiculars to the Frankfort horizontal plane resembled the morphometric plane the most in both the symmetric and asymmetric groups with mean differences of less than 1.00 mm for most variables. However, the standard deviations were often large and clinically significant for these variables. There were clinically relevant differences (>1.00 mm) between the different 3D cephalometric midsagittal planes and the true plane of symmetry determined by the visible facial features. The difference between 3D cephalometric midsagittal planes and the true plane of symmetry determined by the visible facial features were clinically relevant. Care has to be taken using cephalometric midsagittal planes for diagnosis and treatment planning of craniofacial asymmetry as they might differ from the true plane of symmetry as determined by morphometrics. Springer-Verlag 2011-01-27 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3259389/ /pubmed/21271348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0512-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Damstra, Janalt
Fourie, Zacharias
De Wit, Marnix
Ren, Yijin
A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title_full A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title_fullStr A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title_full_unstemmed A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title_short A three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
title_sort three-dimensional comparison of a morphometric and conventional cephalometric midsagittal planes for craniofacial asymmetry
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3259389/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21271348
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0512-4
work_keys_str_mv AT damstrajanalt athreedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT fouriezacharias athreedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT dewitmarnix athreedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT renyijin athreedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT damstrajanalt threedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT fouriezacharias threedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT dewitmarnix threedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry
AT renyijin threedimensionalcomparisonofamorphometricandconventionalcephalometricmidsagittalplanesforcraniofacialasymmetry