medigraphic.com
ISSN 2395-9215 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de Difusión de la Facultad de Odontología de la UNAM

2014, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Ortodon 2014; 2 (2)

Comparative study between digital and manual cephalometry with digital radiographs

Esteva SFJ, Sánchez VA, Meléndez OA, Cedillo APR

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 95-98
PDF size: 204.10 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the reliability of the measures of the computerized cephalometric program Nemoceph Nx, with the tracing done manually with digital lateral skull radiographs to 91% printed on photographic paper. Methods: We used 20 digital lateral radiographs of the skull taken from 20 patients with a Sirona brand direct digital ORTHOPHOS XG Plus cephalostat. Once the captured image was transferred directly to the same computer program (Nemoceph Nx) it was also printed for the tracing of 12 measures: 6 linear a nd 6 angular. Results: A comparison between the manual tracing and the program Nemoceph Nx measures was performed and we found no statistically significant differences (p › 0.05) between the two groups. Conclusions: The results show an excellent reliability for everyday use of the NX Nemoceph program for diagnosis using cephalometric digital radiography.


REFERENCES

  1. Bearn D, Lowe C. Computer-aided learning in orthodontics: is there any out there? Journal of Orthodontics. 2001; 28 (4): 314-316.

  2. Ugalde F. La imagen digital aplicada a la clínica de ortodoncia. Asociación Dental Mexicana. 2005; 62 (6): 23-28.

  3. Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, Roberts CT. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs, part 2: image quality. The Angle Orthodontist. 1996; 66 (1): 43-50.

  4. Cousley RR, Grant E, Kindelan JD. The validity of computerized orthognathic predictions. J Orthod. 2003; 30 (2): 149-154; discussion 128.

  5. Noroozi H. Introduction of a new orthodontic treatment planning software; a fuzzy logic expert system. Int J Orthod Milwaukee. 2006; 17 (2): 25-29.

  6. Cangialosi TJ, Chung JM, Elliott DF, Meistrell ME Jr. Reliability of computer-generated prediction tracing. Angle Orthod. 1995; 65 (4): 277-284.

  7. Tourné L. Digital image processing in orthodontics. Rev Belge Med Dent (1984). 1996; 51 (4): 239-256.

  8. Wastell DG, Johnson JS, Jones JA, Bennett N. Orthodontic analysis and treatment planning: a suite of programs for performing centroid cephalometrics. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1988; 26 (3): 259-265.

  9. Cohen JM. Comparing digital and conventional cephalometric radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128 (2): 157-160.

  10. Paredes V, Gandía JL, Cibrián R. Digital diagnosis records in orthodontics. An overview. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2006; 11 (1): E88-93.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com