Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

3-Dimensional analysis for class III malocclusion patients with facial asymmetry

  • Kim, Eun-Ja (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wonkwang University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Ki, Eun-Jung (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wonkwang University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Cheon, Hae-Myung (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wonkwang University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Choi, Eun-Joo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wonkwang University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kwon, Kyung-Hwan (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wonkwang University Dental Hospital)
  • Received : 2013.05.02
  • Accepted : 2013.08.12
  • Published : 2013.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between 2-dimensional (2D) cephalometric measurement and 3-dimensional (3D) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurement, and to evaluate the availability of 3D analysis for asymmetry patients. Materials and Methods: A total of Twenty-seven patients were evaluated for facial asymmetry by photograph and cephalometric radiograph, and CBCT. The 14 measurements values were evaluated and those for 2D and 3D were compared. The patients were classified into two groups. Patients in group 1 were evaluated for symmetry in the middle 1/3 of the face and asymmetry in the lower 1/3 of the face, and those in group 2 for asymmetry of both the middle and lower 1/3 of the face. Results: In group 1, significant differences were observed in nine values out of 14 values. Values included three from anteroposterior cephalometric radiograph measurement values (cant and both body height) and six from lateral cephalometric radiographs (both ramus length, both lateral ramal inclination, and both gonial angles). In group 2, comparison between 2D and 3D showed significant difference in 10 factors. Values included four from anteroposterior cephalometric radiograph measurement values (both maxillary height, both body height) and six from lateral cephalometric radiographs (both ramus length, both lateral ramal inclination, and both gonial angles). Conclusion: Information from 2D analysis was inaccurate in several measurements. Therefore, in asymmetry patients, 3D analysis is useful in diagnosis of asymmetry.

Keywords

References

  1. Fukushima K, Yasui K, Oatuka Y, Matsui S, Hirase N, Takayanagi J, et al. Morphological characteristics of patients with jaw deformity -Frontal cepharometric evaluation of facial symmetry-. Meikai Univ Dent J 2003;32:118-23.
  2. Tani M, Iketani M, Watanabe M, Suda S, Fujimura N, Miyazawa M, et al. Posterior-anterior cephalometric analysis in patients with dentofacial deformities. J Jpn Stomatol Soc 1989;35:1749-59.
  3. Severt TR, Proffit WR. The prevalence of facial asymmetry in the dentofacial deformities population at the University of North Carolina. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1997;12:171-6.
  4. Samman N, Tong AC, Cheung DL, Tideman H. Analysis of 300 dentofacial deformities in Hong Kong. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1992;7:181-5.
  5. Sassouni V. Diagnosis and treatment planning via roentgenographic cephalometry. Am J Orthodontics 1958;44:433-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(58)90003-4
  6. Ricketts RM. Cephalometric synthesis. Am J Orthod 1960;46:647-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(60)90172-X
  7. Mulick JF. Clinical use of the frontal headfilm. Angle Orthod 1965;35:299-304.
  8. Graber TM. New horizons in case analysis-clinical cephalometrics. Am J Orthodont 1952;38:603-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(52)90027-4
  9. Graber TM. A critical review of clinical cephalometric radiography. Am J Orthodont 1954;40:1-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(54)90166-9
  10. Keen RR, Callahan GR. Osteochondroma of the mandibular condyle: report of case. J Oral Surg 1977;35:140-3.
  11. Gateno J, Xia JJ, Teichgraeber JF. Effect of facial asymmetry on 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional cephalometric measurements. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69:655-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.046
  12. Trpkova B, Prasad NG, Lam EW, Raboud D, Glover KE, Major PW. Assessment of facial asymmetries from posteroanterior cephalograms: validity of reference lines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:512-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(02)57034-7
  13. Kawamata A, Ariji Y, Langlais RP. Three-dimensional computed tomography imaging in dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2000;44: 395-410.
  14. Kawamata A, Fujishita M, Ariji Y, Ariji E. Three-dimensional computed tomographic evaluation of morphologic airway changes after mandibular setback osteotomy for prognathism. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89:278-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(00)70089-8
  15. Haraguchi S, Takada K, Yasuda Y. Facial asymmetry in subjects with skeletal Class III deformity. Angle Orthod 2002;72:28-35.
  16. Cheney EA. Dentofacial asymmetries and their clinical significance. Am J Orthod 1961;47:814-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(61)90062-8
  17. Greiner M, Greiner A, Hirschfelder U. Variance of landmarks in digital evaluations: comparison between CT-based and conventional digital lateral cephalometric radiographs. J Orofac Orthop 2007;68:290-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-007-0710-5
  18. Silling G, Rauch MA, Pentel L, Garfinkel L, Halberstadt G. The significance of cephalometrics in treatment planning. Angle Orthod 1979;49:259-62.
  19. Nijkamp PG, Habets LL, Aartman IH, Zentner A. The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:630-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn059
  20. Turpin DL. British Orthodontic Society revises guidelines for clinical radiography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134: 597-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.09.009
  21. Houston WJ. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983;83:382-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(83)90322-6
  22. van Vlijmen OJ, Maal TJ, Berge SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. A comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional cephalometry on frontal radiographs and on cone beam computed tomography scans of human skulls. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;117:300-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2009.00633.x
  23. van Vlijmen OJ, Berge SJ, Swennen GR, Bronkhorst EM, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:92-7.
  24. Yitschaky O, Redlich M, Abed Y, Faerman M, Casap N, Hiller N. Comparison of common hard tissue cephalometric measurements between computed tomography 3D reconstruction and conventional 2D cephalometric images. Angle Orthod 2011;81:11-6. https://doi.org/10.2319/031710-157.1
  25. Hwang HS, Hwang CH, Lee KH, Kang BC. Maxillofacial 3-dimensional image analysis for the diagnosis of facial asymmetry. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:779-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.021
  26. Gateno J, Xia JJ, Teichgraeber JF. New 3-dimensional cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69:606-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.09.010
  27. Damstra J, Fourie Z, Ren Y. Evaluation and comparison of postero-anterior cephalograms and cone-beam computed tomography images for the detection of mandibular asymmetry. Eur J Orthod 2013;35:45-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr045
  28. Yoon YJ, Kim KS, Hwang MS, Kim HJ, Choi EH, Kim KW. Effect of head rotation on lateral cephalometric radiographs. Angle Orthod 2001;71:396-403.
  29. van Vlijmen OJ, Maal T, Bergé SJ, Bronkhorst EM, Katsaros C, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;39:156-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2009.11.017
  30. Hwang HS, Yuan D, Jeong KH, Uhm GS, Cho JH, Yoon SJ. Three-dimensional soft tissue analysis for the evaluation of facial asymmetry in normal occlusion individuals. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:56-63. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.2.56

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of Lip Cant Change by 2-Jaw Surgery in Class III Asymmetry Cases Using Three-Dimensional Facial Scan in Conjunction With Computed Tomographic Images vol.26, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000001555
  2. Three-dimensional analysis of upper airway morphology in skeletal Class III patients with and without mandibular asymmetry vol.87, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2319/120116-866.1
  3. Selection of a horizontal reference plane in 3D evaluation: Identifying facial asymmetry and occlusal cant in orthognathic surgery planning vol.7, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02250-w
  4. Diagnostic analysis of vertical orbital dystopia and canthal tilt for surgical correction vol.46, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2020.46.6.379