Cargando…
Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare facial flatness indices calculated from the trigonometric formula as opposed to those generated from the direct measurements on three-dimensional radiographs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 322 cone-beam computed tomography radiogr...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Scientific Scholar
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7655991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194310 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_66_2020 |
_version_ | 1783608284019687424 |
---|---|
author | Chalala, Chimène Saadeh, Maria Ayoub, Fouad |
author_facet | Chalala, Chimène Saadeh, Maria Ayoub, Fouad |
author_sort | Chalala, Chimène |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare facial flatness indices calculated from the trigonometric formula as opposed to those generated from the direct measurements on three-dimensional radiographs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 322 cone-beam computed tomography radiographs were digitized and three facial indices (frontal, simotic, and zygomaxillary) were assessed in two different methods and compared between different groups. RESULTS: There was a discrepancy between facial flatness indices generated from the two different approaches. The highest difference was seen in the findings of the simotic index and the lowest for the zygomaxillary index. No statistically significant difference was displayed in the three formula-generated flatness indices between males and females and between growing and non-growing subjects (P > 0.05). The zygomaxillary index was the only measurement revealing no statistically significant difference in Class III sagittal malocclusions (t = −0.5 P = 0.621). The orthodontic application would yield to the same interpretations for both ways of indices calculation. CONCLUSION: The validity of the trigonometric formula used to appraise facial flatness indices might be questionable. The zygomaxillary index could be more clinically considered compared to the frontal and simotic indices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7655991 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Scientific Scholar |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76559912020-11-13 Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment Chalala, Chimène Saadeh, Maria Ayoub, Fouad J Clin Imaging Sci Original Research OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare facial flatness indices calculated from the trigonometric formula as opposed to those generated from the direct measurements on three-dimensional radiographs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 322 cone-beam computed tomography radiographs were digitized and three facial indices (frontal, simotic, and zygomaxillary) were assessed in two different methods and compared between different groups. RESULTS: There was a discrepancy between facial flatness indices generated from the two different approaches. The highest difference was seen in the findings of the simotic index and the lowest for the zygomaxillary index. No statistically significant difference was displayed in the three formula-generated flatness indices between males and females and between growing and non-growing subjects (P > 0.05). The zygomaxillary index was the only measurement revealing no statistically significant difference in Class III sagittal malocclusions (t = −0.5 P = 0.621). The orthodontic application would yield to the same interpretations for both ways of indices calculation. CONCLUSION: The validity of the trigonometric formula used to appraise facial flatness indices might be questionable. The zygomaxillary index could be more clinically considered compared to the frontal and simotic indices. Scientific Scholar 2020-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7655991/ /pubmed/33194310 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_66_2020 Text en © 2020 Published by Scientific Scholar on behalf of Journal of Clinical Imaging Science https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Chalala, Chimène Saadeh, Maria Ayoub, Fouad Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title | Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title_full | Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title_fullStr | Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title_full_unstemmed | Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title_short | Facial Flatness Indices: A Comparison of Two Methods of Assessment |
title_sort | facial flatness indices: a comparison of two methods of assessment |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7655991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194310 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_66_2020 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chalalachimene facialflatnessindicesacomparisonoftwomethodsofassessment AT saadehmaria facialflatnessindicesacomparisonoftwomethodsofassessment AT ayoubfouad facialflatnessindicesacomparisonoftwomethodsofassessment |