4.3 Article

Validation of a novel semi-automated method for three-dimensional surface rendering of condyles using cone beam computed tomography data

Journal

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2013.01.016

Keywords

TMJ; cone beam CT; condylar resorption; segmentation; 3D imaging; condylar remodelling

Funding

  1. Mozaiek grant from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Morphological changes of the condyles are often observed following orthognathic surgery. In addition to clinical assessment, radiographic evaluation of the condyles is required to distinguish the physiological condylar remodelling from pathological condylar resorption. The low contrast resolution and distortion of greyscale values in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans have impeded an accurate three-dimensional (3D) rendering of the condyles. The current study proposes a novel semi-automated method for 3D rendering of condyles using CBCT datasets, and provides a clinical validation of this method. Ten patients were scanned using a standard CBCT scanning protocol. After defining the volume of interest, a greyscale cut-off value was selected to allow an automatic reconstruction of the condylar outline. The condylar contour was further enhanced manually by two independent observers to correct for the under- and over-contoured voxels. Volumetric measurements and surface distance maps of the condyles were computed. The mean within-observer and between-observer differences in condylar volume were 8.62 mm(3) and 6.13 mm(3), respectively. The mean discrepancy between intra- and inter-observer distance maps of the condylar surface was 0.22 mm and 0.13 mm, respectively. This novel method provides a reproducible tool for the 3D rendering of condyles, allowing longitudinal follow-up and quantitative analysis of condylar changes following orthognathic surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available