Surgical Planning Laboratory - Brigham & Women's Hospital - Boston, Massachusetts USA - a teaching affiliate of Harvard Medical School

Surgical Planning Laboratory

The Publication Database hosted by SPL

All Publications | Upload | Advanced Search | Gallery View | Download Statistics | Help | Import | Log in

Comparison of Two Methods for Quantitative Assessment of Mandibular Asymmetry using Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Volumes

Institution:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. alhadidia@dentistry.unc.edu
Publication Date:
Sep-2011
Journal:
Dentomaxillofac Radiol
Volume Number:
40
Issue Number:
6
Pages:
351-7
Citation:
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Sep;40(6):351-7.
PubMed ID:
21831974
PMCID:
PMC3277847
Keywords:
cone beam computed tomography , mandible, asymmetry, surface models, mirroring
Appears in Collections:
NA-MIC, SLICER
Sponsors:
K23 DE017727/DE/NIDCR NIH HHS/United States
R01 DE005215/DE/NIDCR NIH HHS/United States
R03 DE018962/DE/NIDCR NIH HHS/United States
U54 EB005149/EB/NIBIB NIH HHS/United States
Generated Citation:
AlHadidi A., Cevidanes L.H., Mol A., Ludlow J., Styner M. Comparison of Two Methods for Quantitative Assessment of Mandibular Asymmetry using Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Volumes. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Sep;40(6):351-7. PMID: 21831974. PMCID: PMC3277847.
Downloaded: 622 times. [view map]
Paper: Download, View online
Export citation:
Google Scholar: link

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare two methods of measuring mandibular asymmetry. The first method uses mirroring of the mandible in the midsagittal plane; the second uses mirroring of the mandible and registration on the cranial base. METHODS: Surface models were constructed from cone beam CT (CBCT) scans of 50 patients with asymmetry. For the first approach, a midsagittal plane was defined for each patient as the plane passing through nasion, anterior nasal spine and basion. Mirrors for both halves of the mandible were created. The second approach consisted of mirroring the image volume by flipping the left and right sides and then registering the mirrored image onto the cranial base using a mutual information maximization method. Surface distances between hemimandibles and mirrors were calculated for nine regions. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the mean surface distance measurements obtained with the two approaches and when comparing both halves in most areas. CONCLUSION: Both mirroring techniques provided similar quantification of mandibular asymmetry in this cohort.

Additional Material
1 File (156.716kB)
AlHadidi-DentomaxillofacRadiol2011-fig6.jpg (156.716kB)