Cone-beam computed tomography airway measurements: Can we trust them?

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributor.authorObelenis Ryan, Daniel Patrick
dc.contributor.authorBianchi, Jonas [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorIgnacio, Jaqueline [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorWolford, Larry Miller
dc.contributor.authorGoncalves, Joao Roberto [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniv Texas San Antonio
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionBaylor Univ
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-04T12:39:07Z
dc.date.available2019-10-04T12:39:07Z
dc.date.issued2019-07-01
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Pharyngeal airway space (PAS) assessment has been used in the past for a better understanding of orthodontic and surgical outcomes; however, this analysis could be unreliable. Our objective was to evaluate possible changes in the PAS reading in the same patient from their consecutive cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Methods: We evaluated a total of 27 patients' CBCT scans obtained at 2 time points with the use of a standardized acquisition protocol. The mean age at T0 was 31 years (range 17-62 years) and the follow-up records (T1) were taken after 4-6 months. Dolphin Imaging software was used to measure the volumes of the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx. We also evaluated the craniocervical position with the use of a lateral cephalogram. Results: The variables exhibited high intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) when measuring the same CBCT scan twice (T0 and T0). However, The ICC between the measurements performed on the first and second CBCT scans (T0 and T1) showed that the only variable with high reproducibility between the 2 scans was cranial base, with an ICC >0.97. Average differences of 682.1 mm(3), 2255.3 mm(3), and 517.4 mm(3) were found for the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx, respectively. Regarding the cephalometric angles, average differences between T0 and T1 scans were 0.6 degrees, 2.7 degrees, and 0.4 degrees for OPT.CVT, OPT.SN, and cranial base, respectively. Conclusions: Different CBCT exams with equal scanning and patient positioning protocols can result in different 3D PAS readings. A more careful interpretation of CBCT volumetric data to achieve adequate conclusions of the clinical outcomes is necessary.en
dc.description.affiliationUniv Texas San Antonio, Hlth Sci Ctr, San Antonio Sch Dent, San Antonio, TX USA
dc.description.affiliationSao Paulo State Univ, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Pediat Dent, Araraquara, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationBaylor Univ, Med Ctr, Baylor Coll Dent, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg,Texas A&M Univ Hlt, Dallas, TX USA
dc.description.affiliationUnespSao Paulo State Univ, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Pediat Dent, Araraquara, SP, Brazil
dc.format.extent53-60
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.07.024
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal Of Orthodontics And Dentofacial Orthopedics. New York: Mosby-elsevier, v. 156, n. 1, p. 53-60, 2019.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.07.024
dc.identifier.issn0889-5406
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/185844
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000472999100017
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.
dc.relation.ispartofAmerican Journal Of Orthodontics And Dentofacial Orthopedics
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.titleCone-beam computed tomography airway measurements: Can we trust them?en
dc.typeArtigo
dcterms.licensehttp://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policy
dcterms.rightsHolderElsevier B.V.
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-3749-0918[2]

Arquivos

Coleções

Artigos - Clínica Infantil - FOAR