Comparison of Three-Dimensional and Two-Dimensional Computed Tomography Scans for Cephalometric Mandibular Measurements in Thailand: A Retrospective Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31584/psumj.2025271329Keywords:
age, cephalometric measurement, mandibles, maxillofacial boneAbstract
Objective: To evaluate whether 2D computerized tomography (CT) cephalometric measurements are comparable to 3D CT measurements of the mandible bone.
Material and Methods: In this retrospective study, we collected data from patients who visited the emergency room of Songklanagarind Hospital between 2017 and 2020. A single operator identified 11 landmarks for cephalometric measurements in all images. Each image underwent three separate tracings, and subsequent repeated measurements were employed for further statistical analyses.
Results: This study included 135 patients (87 males and 48 females). The mean age of the patients was 40.48±15 years. Nine of the eleven parameters showed a significant difference between the 2D and 3D cephalometric measurements (p-value<0.05). Male patients had a longer mandible than female patients, and there was a statistically significant size difference between the sexes (p-value<0.05), except for the mental foramen size (pair t-test >0.05). Length measurements displayed a statistically significant positive correlation with height and BSA (p-value<0.05), while no correlation was observed with body mass index (BMI) (p-value>0.05). Angle measurements did not exhibit any correlation with height, BSA, or BMI.
Conclusion: In this study, 2D cephalometric measurements were significantly different from 3D CT measurements in each individual. Based on these findings, we recommend that surgeons should consider using 3D CT cephalometric measurements.
References
Koshy JC, Feldman EM, Chike-Obi CJ, Bullocks JM. Pearls of mandibular trauma management. Semin Plast Surg 2010;24:357–74.
Iwanaga J, Choi PJ. Anatomy and variations of the mental foramen. In: Iwanaga J, Tubbs RS, editors. Anatomical variations in clinical dentistry. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019;p.59–71.
Kumar BP, Venkatesh V, Kumar KAJ, Yadav BY, Mohan SR. Mandibular reconstruction: overview. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2016;15:425–41.
Burkey BB, Coleman JR. Current concepts in oromandibular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1997;30:607–30.
Becker ST, Menzebach M, Küchler T, Hertrampf K, Wenz H-J, Wiltfang J. Quality of life in oral cancer patients – effects of mandible resection and socio-cultural aspects. J CranioMaxillofac Surg 2012;40:24–7.
Olayemi AB. Assessment and determination of human mandibular and dental arch profiles in subjects with lower third molar impaction in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2011;1:126–30.
Damera A, Mohanalakhsmi J, Yellarthi PK, Rezwana BM. Radiographic evaluation of mandibular ramus for gender estimation: retrospective study. J Forensic Dent Sci 2016;8:74–8.
van Vlijmen OJC, 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.
Kim YH, Kang SJ, Sun H. Cephalometric angular measurements of the mandible using three-dimensional computed tomography scans in Koreans. Arch Plast Surg 2016;43:32–7.
Markic G, Müller L, Patcas R, Roos M, Lochbühler N, Peltomäki T, et al. Assessing the length of the mandibular ramus and the condylar process: a comparison of OPG, CBCT, CT, MRI, and lateral cephalometric measurements. Eur J Orthod 2015;37:13–21.
Greenstein G, Tarnow D. The mental foramen and nerve: clinical and anatomical factors related to dental implant placement: a literature review. J Periodontol 2006;77:1933–43.
Ongkana N. Gender difference in Thai mandibles using metric analysis. Chiang Mai Med J 2009;48:43-8.
Hofer SO, Payne CE. Functional and aesthetic outcome enhancement of head and neck reconstruction through secondary procedures. Semin Plast Surg 2010;24:309-18.
Bholsithi W, Tharanon W, Chintakanon K, Komolpis R, Sinthanayothin C. Sinthanayothin 3D vs. 2D cephalometric analysis comparisons with repeated measurements from 20 Thai males and 20 Thai females. Biomed Imaging Interv J 2009;5:e21.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
