Cargando…
Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional cephalometric analyses are getting more attraction in orthodontics. The aim of this study was to compare two softwares to evaluate three-dimensional cephalometric analyses of orthodontic treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty cone beam computed tomography ima...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4238078/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25426454 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.143230 |
_version_ | 1782345457152819200 |
---|---|
author | Sawchuk, Dena Alhadlaq, Adel Alkhadra, Thamer Carlyle, Terry D Kusnoto, Budi El-Bialy, Tarek |
author_facet | Sawchuk, Dena Alhadlaq, Adel Alkhadra, Thamer Carlyle, Terry D Kusnoto, Budi El-Bialy, Tarek |
author_sort | Sawchuk, Dena |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional cephalometric analyses are getting more attraction in orthodontics. The aim of this study was to compare two softwares to evaluate three-dimensional cephalometric analyses of orthodontic treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty cone beam computed tomography images were obtained using i-CAT(®) imaging system from patient's records as part of their regular orthodontic records. The images were analyzed using InVivoDental5.0 (Anatomage Inc.) and 3DCeph™ (University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA) software. Before and after orthodontic treatments data were analyzed using t-test. RESULTS: Reliability test using interclass correlation coefficient was stronger for InVivoDental5.0 (0.83-0.98) compared with 3DCeph™ (0.51-0.90). Paired t-test comparison of the two softwares shows no statistical significant difference in the measurements made in the two softwares. CONCLUSIONS: InVivoDental5.0 measurements are more reproducible and user friendly when compared to 3DCeph™. No statistical difference between the two softwares in linear or angular measurements. 3DCeph™ is more time-consuming in performing three-dimensional analysis compared with InVivoDental5.0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4238078 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42380782014-11-25 Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software Sawchuk, Dena Alhadlaq, Adel Alkhadra, Thamer Carlyle, Terry D Kusnoto, Budi El-Bialy, Tarek J Orthod Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional cephalometric analyses are getting more attraction in orthodontics. The aim of this study was to compare two softwares to evaluate three-dimensional cephalometric analyses of orthodontic treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty cone beam computed tomography images were obtained using i-CAT(®) imaging system from patient's records as part of their regular orthodontic records. The images were analyzed using InVivoDental5.0 (Anatomage Inc.) and 3DCeph™ (University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA) software. Before and after orthodontic treatments data were analyzed using t-test. RESULTS: Reliability test using interclass correlation coefficient was stronger for InVivoDental5.0 (0.83-0.98) compared with 3DCeph™ (0.51-0.90). Paired t-test comparison of the two softwares shows no statistical significant difference in the measurements made in the two softwares. CONCLUSIONS: InVivoDental5.0 measurements are more reproducible and user friendly when compared to 3DCeph™. No statistical difference between the two softwares in linear or angular measurements. 3DCeph™ is more time-consuming in performing three-dimensional analysis compared with InVivoDental5.0. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4238078/ /pubmed/25426454 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.143230 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Orthodontic Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Sawchuk, Dena Alhadlaq, Adel Alkhadra, Thamer Carlyle, Terry D Kusnoto, Budi El-Bialy, Tarek Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title | Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title_full | Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title_fullStr | Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title_short | Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
title_sort | comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4238078/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25426454 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.143230 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sawchukdena comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware AT alhadlaqadel comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware AT alkhadrathamer comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware AT carlyleterryd comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware AT kusnotobudi comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware AT elbialytarek comparisonoftwothreedimensionalcephalometricanalysiscomputersoftware |