IADR Abstract Archives
CBCT versus CT-Based Models on Assessing Condylar Morphology: Pilot Study
Objectives: The aim of this study was to quantitatively compare assessments of mandibular condyle morphology using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multislice Spiral CT (MSCT) virtual 3D surface models.
Methods: Secondary data analysis of CBCT and MSCT scans obtained for clinical purposes from 47 patients (94 condyles) treated with condylar resection and prosthetic joint replacement was conducted. 3D surface models of the condyles were constructed for each analogous CBCT and MSCT scans, and all the left condyles were mirrored to form right condyles. A landmark-based approach was used for both pairwise and across-subject registration, making it possible to create an average CBCT and CT-based condylar models. Shape Correspondence (SPHARM-PDM) was performed to establish homologous correspondent points on each CBCT and MSCT model. ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA was computed in order to assess the differences between the groups.
Results: ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA showed no statistically significant difference between CBCT and MSCT-based models (P > 0.3453). The minimum and maximum differences observed were -0.11mm and 0.12mm, respectively.
Conclusions: CBCT-based models are comparable to those derived from MSCT scans and may be considered reliable tools for assessing mandibular condyle morphology.
Methods: Secondary data analysis of CBCT and MSCT scans obtained for clinical purposes from 47 patients (94 condyles) treated with condylar resection and prosthetic joint replacement was conducted. 3D surface models of the condyles were constructed for each analogous CBCT and MSCT scans, and all the left condyles were mirrored to form right condyles. A landmark-based approach was used for both pairwise and across-subject registration, making it possible to create an average CBCT and CT-based condylar models. Shape Correspondence (SPHARM-PDM) was performed to establish homologous correspondent points on each CBCT and MSCT model. ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA was computed in order to assess the differences between the groups.
Results: ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA showed no statistically significant difference between CBCT and MSCT-based models (P > 0.3453). The minimum and maximum differences observed were -0.11mm and 0.12mm, respectively.
Conclusions: CBCT-based models are comparable to those derived from MSCT scans and may be considered reliable tools for assessing mandibular condyle morphology.