Academic literature on the topic 'Cephalometric superimposition'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Cephalometric superimposition.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Cephalometric superimposition"
1
Gu, Yan, and James A. McNamara. "Cephalometric Superimpositions." Angle Orthodontist 78, no. 6 (November 1, 2008): 967–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/070107-301.1.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Objective: To test the hypothesis that there is no difference between the information produced by superimposition of serial lateral headfilms on anatomical structures and that produced by superimposition on metallic implants according to the protocols of Björk. Materials and Methods: Serial cephalograms of 10 untreated subjects who had tantalum implants placed in the maxilla and mandible during childhood were analyzed. Headfilms taken at six consecutive stages of cervical vertebral maturation (CS1-CS6) for six female and four male subjects were used. Tracings were superimposed according to the methods of superimpositions advocated by the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO). In addition, superimpositions along the inferior border of the mandible were performed. Finally, superimpositions of serial tracings on stable intraosseous implants were made to determine the actual growth and remodeling patterns of the maxilla and mandible. Results: The ABO maxillary superimposition method underestimates the vertical displacement and overestimates the forward movement of maxillary landmarks. Superimposing on the internal cortical outline of the symphysis and the inferior alveolar nerve canals generally approximates the mandibular superimposition on implants, although the lower anterior border of the symphysis may be a preferable area of superimposition. Superimposition on the lower border of the mandible does not reflect accurately the actual pattern of growth and remodeling of the mandible. Conclusions: When analyzing serial headfilms, erroneous information concerning patterns of bone growth and remodeling can be obtained if convenient, but biologically incorrect superimposition protocols are used. In addition, tooth movements measured can be distorted significantly depending on the method of superimposition.
2
Al-Taai, Nameer, Eva Levring Jäghagen, Maurits Persson, Maria Ransjö, and Anna Westerlund. "A Superimposition-Based Cephalometric Method to Quantitate Craniofacial Changes." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 10 (May 14, 2021): 5260. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105260.
Full textAbstract:
To assess the craniofacial changes related to growth and/or to orthodontic and orthognathic treatments, it is necessary to superimpose serial radiographs on stable structures. However, conventional superimposition provides only a graphical illustration of these changes. To increase the precision of growth and treatment evaluations, it is desirable to quantitate these craniofacial changes. The aims of this study were to (1) evaluate a superimposition-based cephalometric method to process numerical data for craniofacial growth changes and (2) identify a valid, reliable, and feasible method for superimposition. Forty pairs of cephalograms were analyzed at T1 and T2 (mean age 9.9 and 15.0 years, respectively). The superimposition-based cephalometric method involved relating the sagittal and vertical measurements on the T2 radiographs to the nasion and sella landmarks on the T1 radiographs. Validity and reliability were evaluated for three superimposition methods: the sella-nasion (SN); the tuberculum sella-wing (TW); and Björk’s structural. Superimposition-based cephalometrics can be used to quantify craniofacial changes digitally. The numerical data from the superimposition-based cephalometrics reflected a graphical illustration of superimposition and differed significantly from the data acquired through conventional cephalometrics. Superimposition using the TW method is recommended as it is valid, reliable, and feasible.
3
Moon, Jun-Ho, Hye-Won Hwang, and Shin-Jae Lee. "Evaluation of an automated superimposition method for computer-aided cephalometrics." Angle Orthodontist 90, no. 3 (February 3, 2020): 390–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/071319-469.1.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate a new superimposition method compatible with computer-aided cephalometrics and to compare superimposition error to that of the conventional Sella-Nasion (SN) superimposition method. Materials and Methods A total of 283 lateral cephalometric radiographs were collected and cephalometric landmark identification was performed twice by the same examiner at a 3-month interval. The second tracing was superimposed on the first tracing by both the SN superimposition method and the new, proposed method. The proposed method not only relied on SN landmarks but also minimized the differences between four additional landmarks: Porion, Orbitale, Basion, and Pterygoid. The errors between the landmarks of the duplicate tracings oriented by the two superimposition methods were calculated at Anterior Nasal Spine, Point A, Point B, Pogonion, and Gonion. The paired t-test was used to find any statistical difference in the superimposition errors by the two superimposition methods and to investigate whether there existed clinically significant differences between the two methods. Results The proposed method demonstrated smaller superimposition errors than did the conventional SN superimposition method. When comparisons between the two superimposition methods were made with a 1-mm error range, there were clinically significant differences between them. Conclusions The proposed method that was compatible with computer-aided cephalometrics might be a reliable superimposition method for superimposing serial cephalometric images.
4
Janjua-Sharif, F. N. "Handbook of cephalometric superimposition." British Dental Journal 212, no. 11 (June 2012): 568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.519.
Full text
5
Little, Robert. "Handbook of cephalometric superimposition." American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 140, no. 4 (October 2011): 597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.08.013.
Full text
6
Huja, S. S., E. L. Grubaugh, A. M. Rummel, H. W. Fields, and F. M. Beck. "Comparison of Hand-Traced and Computer-Based Cephalometric Superimpositions." Angle Orthodontist 79, no. 3 (May 1, 2009): 428–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/052708-283.1.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Objective: To determine the ability to produce comparable superimpositions using hand tracing and digital methods (Dolphin v10). In addition, if the two methods were comparable, we wanted to determine if a difference existed between the best-fit cranial base superimposition and S-N superimpositions using the digital method. Methods and Materials: Sixty-four initial (T1) and final (T2) cephalometric film radiographs were obtained. Cranial base and regional superimpositions were completed independently for each pair of radiographs by either hand tracing and digital methods. To quantitatively evaluate the differences between the two methods, the hand and digital superimpositions were digitized to obtain x-y coordinates of routine cephalometric landmarks at T2. Linear distance between multiple corresponding (hand and digital) T2 cephalometric landmark locations (e.g., A point) were measured and defined as the T2 landmark distance (T2 LD). Additionally, 61 patient records were used to compare the digital method for best-fit cranial base superimpositions versus S-N superimpositions. A Friedman test was applied to examine for differences. Results: The upper 95% confidence limit for the mean of the T2 LD for hand and digital superimposition methods was <1 mm for all landmarks except maxillary incisor tip and apex. The upper 95% confidence interval for best-fit vs S-N was >1 mm for most landmarks. Conclusion: This study validates the use of superimpositions produced by Dolphin Imaging version 10 and is a necessary step forward toward widespread acceptance of digital superimpositions.
7
Lenza, Marcos Augusto, Adilson Alves de Carvalho, Eduardo Beaton Lenza, Mauricio Guilherme Lenza, Hianne Miranda de Torres, and João Batista de Souza. "Radiographic evaluation of orthodontic treatment by means of four different cephalometric superimposition methods." Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 20, no. 3 (June 2015): 29–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.3.029-036.oar.
Full textAbstract:
INTRODUCTION: Despite discussion on the merit of various cephalometric superimposition methods, there remains a need to assess which one can be used in daily practice with reasonably accuracy and less working time. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate four methods of cephalometric superimposition by means of assessing the longitudinal changes in craniofacial morphology caused by growth and response of adolescents with Class I malocclusion to orthodontic treatment involving first premolar extraction. METHODS: Pretreatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2) standardized lateral cephalometric radiographs of 31 adolescents (20 females and 11 males), with Angle Class I malocclusion and indication of premolar extraction, participated in this study. Radiographs were digitized, traced and had structures identified by means of a cephalometric software. Four superimposition methods were used: Björk structural method, Steiner/Tweed SN line, Ricketts N-Ba line at N-point and Ricketts N-Ba line at CC-point. Positional changes were quantified by horizontal and vertical linear changes in the following cephalometric landmarks: anterior/posterior nasal spine (ANS and PNS), gnathion (Gn), Gonion (Go), Pogonion (Pog), A-point and B-point. Differences between T1 and T2 in horizontal and vertical positional changes for all superimposition methods were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bonferroni correction (p < 0.05). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences among the cephalometric superimposition methods or when patients' sex was considered. CONCLUSION: Björk structural method, Steiner/Tweed SN line, Ricketts N-Ba line at N-point and Ricketts N-Ba line at CC-point methods were reliable and presented similar precision when the overall facial changes due to active growth and/or orthodontic treatment were examined.
8
Xia, James J., MJ Gliddon, J. Gateno, JF Teichgraeber, HTF Wong, and MAK Liebschner. "The accuracy of cephalometric tracing superimposition." Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 61, no. 8 (August 2003): 78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(03)00598-6.
Full text
9
Gliddon, Michael J., James J. Xia, Jaime Gateno, Helena T. F. Wong, Robert E. Lasky, John F. Teichgraeber, Xiaolan Jia, Michael A. K. Liebschner, and Jeremy J. Lemoine. "The Accuracy of Cephalometric Tracing Superimposition." Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 64, no. 2 (February 2006): 194–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2005.10.028.
Full text
10
Huggare, J. "The handbook of cephalometric superimposition (2011)." European Journal of Orthodontics 34, no. 3 (April 6, 2012): 396–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs024.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Cephalometric superimposition"
1
Krieger, Glenn. "Cephalometric regional superimpositions -- digital vs. analog accuracy and precision : 1. the maxilla." Thesis, NSUWorks, 2014. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hpd_cdm_stuetd/58.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to measure the displacement of defined dental structures, as a result of superimposition of cephalometric images across paired time-points by both digital and analog methods. The magnitudes of such displacements across three methods of superimposition were compared to each other and to a reference method constructed by registering superimposed cephalometric images on tantalum markers implanted in the study participants' maxillae. The defined dental structures were: 1) First molar mesial contact point; 2) First molar apical root bisection; 3) Central incisor root apex; 4) Central incisor crown incisal edge. Methods: Lateral cephalograms of 22 patients containing tantalum implants from the Mathews acquisition group were digitized, traced and superimposed using analog (implant and structural) and digital (Dolphin and QuickCeph) methods. Superimpositions were exported to Adobe Photoshop where they were scaled and displacement of defined dental landmarks measured using a Cartesian coordinate system. A random-effects, generalized linear model with Bonferroni adjustment was used to compare the different methods. Results: The structural method (p < 0.01) showed statistically significant differences versus the implant method and demonstrated the smallest 95% confidence interval range compared to Quick Ceph and Dolphin (0.45mm, 0.75mm, and 0.95mm, respectively). The four structural method landmarks demonstrated statistically significant differences versus the implant method (p
2
Bronzi, Evandro da Silva [UNESP]. "Avaliação das estruturas anatômicas para sobreposição cefalométrica maxilar utilizando telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus." Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), 2002. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/95777.
Full textAbstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:27:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0
Previous issue date: 2002-01-21Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T18:32:10Z : No. of bitstreams: 1
bronzi_es_me_arafo.pdf: 640601 bytes, checksum: 0d65746f66a182b139908ba7275d7753 (MD5)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Um estudo cefalométrico longitudinal e retrospectivo foi desenvolvido com o propósito de estabelecer um cefalograma para a maxila, encontrar pontos cefalométricos estáveis na telerradiografia em norma de 45 graus, e ainda avaliar se as imagens obtidas de um lado da radiografia oblíqua são compatíveis com o outro lado. Foram selecionadas telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus de 25 indivíduos, com faixa etária entre 12 e 17 anos, apresentando maloclusões de Classe I e Classe II de Angle. Todos os indivíduos possuíam radiografias oblíquas iniciais e finais dos lados direito e esquerdo tomadas em um mesmo aparelho de raios X, com um intervalo de 8 a 16 meses. O principal critério de inclusão era a presença de implantes metálicos em todas as telerradiografias , para sobreposições dos traçados cefalométricos. Após estudos em crânio seco e inspeção visual foi sugerido um cefalograma para a maxila constituído das seguintes estruturas anatômicas: contorno da órbita, uma linha da base do crânio, a região do processo zigomático, limites de seio maxilar, a maxila, o processo zigomático da maxila do lado oposto, o osso zigomático do lado oposto e a órbita do lado oposto. Os pontos cefalométricos sugeridos para servir de parâmetro na sobreposição parcial da maxila, em telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus, foram divididos de acordo com o sentido analisado. No sentido vertical os pontos mais estáveis foram: OS, PZI, ENP e PZMO. No sentido horizontal os pontos sugeridos foram: PZP, PZPI, PZI, ENA e A. As alterações anatômicas ocorridas em todos os pontos cefalométricos do lado esquerdo foram iguais as do lado direito, não havendo diferença entre os lados da tomada radiográfica para telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus.
A longitudinal and retrospective cephalometric study was developed in order to establish a maxillary cephalogram, to identify stable cephalometric landmarks on 45° radiographs, as well as to evaluate if the obtained images from one side are compatible with the ones from the other side. Forty-five degrees cephalometric radiographs of 25 persons, aged between 12 and 17 years, presenting Angle malocclusion: Class I and Class II were selected. All the persons had pre and post right and left oblique radiographs obtained from the same X ray device, with an interval of eight to sixteen months. The primary inclusion criterion was the presence of metallic implants in all radiographs, to obtain the cephalometric tracings superimpositions. After studies in dried skulls and visual inspection, a maxillary cephalogram was suggested using the following anatomical structures: the orbital contour, a cranial base line, the zigomatic process area, maxillary sinus boundaries, the maxilla; the maxillary zygomatic process, zigomatic bone and orbit of the counter side. The cephalometric landmarks suggested to work parameter for maxillary superimposition in 45º cephalometric radiographs were separated in accordance with the evaluated plane. It can be suggested the use of OS, PZI, PNS and PZMO on vertical planes and PZP, PZPI, PZI, ANS and A on horizontal plane considered the points more stable and reproducible in the sample. The anatomical changes observed in all the cephalometric points of the left side were equivalent to the ones of the right side, with no differences between the sides on 45º cephalometric radiographs.
3
Bronzi, Evandro da Silva. ""Avaliação das estruturas anatômicas para sobreposição cefalométrica maxilar utilizando telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus" /." Araraquara : [s.n.], 2002. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/95777.
Full textAbstract:
Orientador: Maurício Tatsuei SakimaBanca: Luiz Gonzaga Gandini Júnior
Banca: Paulo César Saquy
Resumo: Um estudo cefalométrico longitudinal e retrospectivo foi desenvolvido com o propósito de estabelecer um cefalograma para a maxila, encontrar pontos cefalométricos estáveis na telerradiografia em norma de 45 graus, e ainda avaliar se as imagens obtidas de um lado da radiografia oblíqua são compatíveis com o outro lado. Foram selecionadas telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus de 25 indivíduos, com faixa etária entre 12 e 17 anos, apresentando maloclusões de Classe I e Classe II de Angle. Todos os indivíduos possuíam radiografias oblíquas iniciais e finais dos lados direito e esquerdo tomadas em um mesmo aparelho de raios X, com um intervalo de 8 a 16 meses. O principal critério de inclusão era a presença de implantes metálicos em todas as telerradiografias , para sobreposições dos traçados cefalométricos. Após estudos em crânio seco e inspeção visual foi sugerido um cefalograma para a maxila constituído das seguintes estruturas anatômicas: contorno da órbita, uma linha da base do crânio, a região do processo zigomático, limites de seio maxilar, a maxila, o processo zigomático da maxila do lado oposto, o osso zigomático do lado oposto e a órbita do lado oposto. Os pontos cefalométricos sugeridos para servir de parâmetro na sobreposição parcial da maxila, em telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus, foram divididos de acordo com o sentido analisado. No sentido vertical os pontos mais estáveis foram: OS, PZI, ENP e PZMO. No sentido horizontal os pontos sugeridos foram: PZP, PZPI, PZI, ENA e A. As alterações anatômicas ocorridas em todos os pontos cefalométricos do lado esquerdo foram iguais as do lado direito, não havendo diferença entre os lados da tomada radiográfica para telerradiografias em norma de 45 graus.
Abstract: A longitudinal and retrospective cephalometric study was developed in order to establish a maxillary cephalogram, to identify stable cephalometric landmarks on 45° radiographs, as well as to evaluate if the obtained images from one side are compatible with the ones from the other side. Forty-five degrees cephalometric radiographs of 25 persons, aged between 12 and 17 years, presenting Angle malocclusion: Class I and Class II were selected. All the persons had pre and post right and left oblique radiographs obtained from the same X ray device, with an interval of eight to sixteen months. The primary inclusion criterion was the presence of metallic implants in all radiographs, to obtain the cephalometric tracings superimpositions. After studies in dried skulls and visual inspection, a maxillary cephalogram was suggested using the following anatomical structures: the orbital contour, a cranial base line, the zigomatic process area, maxillary sinus boundaries, the maxilla; the maxillary zygomatic process, zigomatic bone and orbit of the counter side. The cephalometric landmarks suggested to work parameter for maxillary superimposition in 45º cephalometric radiographs were separated in accordance with the evaluated plane. It can be suggested the use of OS, PZI, PNS and PZMO on vertical planes and PZP, PZPI, PZI, ANS and A on horizontal plane considered the points more stable and reproducible in the sample. The anatomical changes observed in all the cephalometric points of the left side were equivalent to the ones of the right side, with no differences between the sides on 45º cephalometric radiographs.
Mestre
4
McCaffrey, Kevin. "Cephalometric regional superimpositions -- digital vs. analog accuracy and precision: 2. the mandible." Thesis, NSUWorks, 2014. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hpd_cdm_stuetd/19.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Lateral cephalometric superimpositions (LCS) are used to measure dental and skeletal changes that occur in the craniofacial complex over time. Orthodontists use LCSs to assess treatment outcomes. The purpose of this study was to conduct an assessment of the measured displacement of defined dental landmarks across digital and analog methods of mandibular regional serial superimposition as compared to an implant-registered superimposition reference. The data used in this study was derived from the Mathew's Acquisition Group implant sample; the first United States longitudinal study of growing children with maxillary and mandibular Björk type metallic implants. Methods: Sixty-six lateral cephalometric radiographs were selected from twenty-two children. Three cephalometric tracings were completed for each subject that were then superimposed pairwise (T1 vs. T2, T2 vs. T3) across four separate methods of superimposition, two analog: Implant, Structural; and two digital: Dolphin, Quick Ceph. Each superimposition was then imported into Adobe Photoshop where the images were scaled and the displacement of defined dental structures was measured. Defined dental structures included: (1) first molar mesial contact point, (2) first molar apical root bisection, (3) central incisor root apex, and (4) central incisor crown incisal edge. A random-effects, generalized linear model was used to contrast dental landmark displacement measurements. Results: There was no difference between the mean displacement of defined dental structures between different methods (p=0.145). There was no difference between the different methods by defined dental structure (p=0.150). Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that there are no statistically significant differences among three methods of mandibular regional superimposition in comparison to an implant-registered (reference) method (analog: Structural, Implant; digital: Dolphin, and Quick Ceph). The historical data set utilized in our study, limited by the small sample size, resulted in a relatively low power (0.15). A low power increases the likelihood of incorrectly failing to reject a null hypothesis that is actually false. which must be considered in our study.
5
Shaw, Douglas. "Cephalometric regional superimpositions -- digital vs. analog accuracy and precision : 3. the cranial base." Thesis, NSUWorks, 2014. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hpd_cdm_stuetd/18.
Full textAbstract:
Objective. To assess the accuracy and precision in measurement of pairwise implant displacement across three methods of cranial base superimposition. Background. Cephalometric superimposition is the principal radiographic method used to evaluate changes within the craniofacial skeleton. Many studies have examined the accuracy of software intended to produce cephalometric superimposition. Such studies have utilized anatomic landmarks, selected by the respective software manufacturers, as registration points for constructing superimpositions and their analysis. As a result, these studies are only as accurate as the stability and validity of anatomic registration landmarks used. To our knowledge, no other study has utilized metallic implants to critically assess digital vs. analog cephalometric cranial base superimposition. Methods. Serial cephalograms from twenty-two patients across three time points containing metallic implants were obtained from the Mathews Acquisition Group. Each of the sixty-six cephalograms was traced by hand and digitally. Cranial base superimpositions were completed according to the analog structural method proposed by Björk and Skieller, and Johnston, and then by Dolphin version 11.5 and Quick Ceph Studio V3.2.8 digital software according to manufactures instructions. Total displacement measurements of selected implants across paired time points were recorded for both digital methods and analog method of superimposition with analog serving as the reference. Results: There were no statistically significant contrasts of mean total displacement of implants by superimposition method (p = 0.999). No significant differences are reported in mean implant displacement when comparing digital to analog superimposition methods for contrasts by time, structure, or implant location. Conclusions: The results show that there are no significant differences in accuracy and precision of digital and analog cranial base superimposition. The results of this study suggest that cranial base superimpositions on S-Na that are registered on S may be a good approximation of the structural method of cranial base superimposition. There are many methodological differences between digital and analog cranial base superimposition and future research examining such differences is recommended.
Books on the topic "Cephalometric superimposition"
1
Pierre-Georges, Planché, ed. Handbook of cephalometric superimposition. Hanover Park, IL: Quintessence Pub., 2011.
Find full text
2
Kusa, Lenka. A comparison of cephalometric superimposition techniques in orthodontics. 2002.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Cephalometric superimposition"
1
Ibáñez, Oscar, Oscar Cordón, Sergio Damas, and Jose Santamaría. "Craniofacial Superimposition Based on Genetic Algorithms and Fuzzy Location of Cephalometric Landmarks." In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 599–607. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87656-4_74.
Full text