Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Repeatability and reproducibility of landmark localization on panoramic images for PA (Posteroanterior) cephalometric analysis

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine the repeatability and reproducibility of landmark localization on panoramic images for PA (Posteroanterior) cephalometric analysis. Lateral, PA and panoramic images of 20 patients were acquired for landmark localization by 2 different observers 2 times each of them. 14 bilateral landmarks were plotted on 20 PA and 20 panoramic images which makes a total of 40 × 28x4 = 4480 landmarks which were plotted to compute the measurements. The calibration of all three images was performed and measurements of each landmark were recorded from its position to the mid-sagittal plane. The repeatability and reproducibility of the panoramic images and PA cephalometric images was found good and sufficient to use in further experiments. The study’s findings on repeatability and reproducibility back up the premise of obtaining PA analysis using panoramic radiographs. As a result, it’s safe to presume that the repeatability of landmark placement among appropriately educated observers is sufficient to provide reliable test findings from panoramic radiographs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data is received from the clinic with IEC approval and can be made available for the validation purposes only.

References:

  1. Hirschfelder U, Piechot E, Schulte M, Leher A (2004) Abnormalities of the TMJ and the musculature in the oculo-auriculo-vertebral spectrum (OAV). A CT study. J Orofac Orthop 65:204–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gupta A (2023) On imaging modalities for cephalometric analysis: a review. Multimed Tools Appl

  3. Schmid W, Mongini F, Felisio A (1991) A computer-based assessment of structural and displacement asymmetries of the mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 100:19–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chebib FS, Chamma AM (1981) Indices of craniofacial asymmetry. Angle Orthod 51(214):26

    Google Scholar 

  5. Grummons DC, Kappeyne van de Coppello MA (1987) Frontal asymmetry analysis. J Clin Orthod 21:448–65

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ricketts RM, Grummons D (2003) Frontal cephalometrics: practical applications, part 1. World J Orthod 4:297–316

    Google Scholar 

  7. Grummons D, Ricketts RM (2004) Frontal cephalometrics: practical applications, part 2. World J Orthod 5(2):99–119

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kitai N et al (2004) Craniofacial morphology in an unusual case with nasal aplasia studied by roentgencephalometry and three-dimensional CT scanning. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 41:208–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hwang H-S, Hwang CH, Lee K-H, Kang B-C (2006) Maxillofacial 3-dimensional image analysis for the diagnosis of facial asymmetry. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 130:779–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McDavid WD, Tronje G, Welander U, Morris CR (1981) Effects of errors in film speed and beam alignment on the image layer in rotational panoramic radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 52:561–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friedland B (1998) Clinical radiological issues in orthodontic practice. Semin Orthod 4:64–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yeo DK, Freer TJ, Brockhurst PJ (2002) Distortions in panoramic radiographs. Aust Orthod J 18:92–98

    Google Scholar 

  13. Titiz I, Laubinger M, Keller T, Hertrich K, Hirschfelder U (2012) Repeatability and reproducibility of landmarks—a three-dimensional computed tomography study. Eur J Orthod 34:276–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gupta A (2022) RegCal: registration-based calibration method to perform linear measurements on PA (posteroanterior) cephalogram- a pilot study. Multimed Tools Appl 81:41869–41879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11609-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. De Oliveira AE, Cevidanes LH, Phillips C, Motta A, Burke B, Tyndall D (2009) Observer reliability of three-dimensional cephalometric landmark identification on cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107:256–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Houston WJ, Maher RE, McElroy D, Sherriff M (1986) Sources of error in measurements from cephalometric radiographs. Eur J Orthod 8(3):149–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Vincent AM, West VC (1987) Cephalometric landmark identification error. Aust Orthod J 10(2):98–104

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chadwick JW, Prentice RN, Major PW, Lam EW (2009) Image distortion and magnification of 3 digital CCD cephalometric systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 107:105–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schulze RK, Gloede MB, Doll GM (2002) Landmark identification on direct digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: a human skull study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 122:635–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gupta A, Kharbanda OP, Balachandran R, Sardana V, Kalra S, Chaurasia S et al (2017) Precision of manual landmark identification between as-received and oriented volume-rendered cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 151:118–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gupta A, Kharbanda O, Sardana V, Balachandran R, Sardana H (2015) A knowledge-based algorithm for automatic detection of cephalometric landmarks on CBCT images. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 10:1737–1752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gupta A, Kharbanda OP, Sardana V, Balachandran R, Sardana HK (2016) Accuracy of 3D cephalometric measurements based on an automatic knowledge-based landmark detection algorithm. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 11:1297–1309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gupta A (2020) Challenges for Computer Aided Diagnostics using X-Ray and Tomographic Reconstruction Images in craniofacial applications. Int J Comput Vis Robot 10:360–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gupta A (2019) Current research opportunities of image processing and computer vision. Comput Sci 20(4). https://doi.org/10.7494/csci.2019.20.4.3163

  25. Cohen MM Jr (1995) Perspectives on craniofacial asymmetry. III. Common and/or well-known causes of asymmetry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 24:127–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sayinsu K, Isik F, Trakyali G, Arun T (2007) An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings. Eur J Orthod 29:105–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments Organisation, Chandigarh, India

    Abhishek Gupta & Prashant Kumar

  2. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad, 201002, India

    Abhishek Gupta & Prashant Kumar

  3. Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Room 3015, Bathinda, Punjab, India

    Shailendra Singh Rana & Arshad Eranhikkal

Authors
  1. Abhishek Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shailendra Singh Rana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arshad Eranhikkal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Prashant Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shailendra Singh Rana.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards." The ethical approval was received from Institutional Ethics Committee of AIIMS (All India Institutes of Medical Sciences), Bathinda to conduct this study under IEC No. IEC-01/2020–015.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gupta, A., Rana, S.S., Eranhikkal, A. et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of landmark localization on panoramic images for PA (Posteroanterior) cephalometric analysis. Multimed Tools Appl 83, 35979–35993 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-16961-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-16961-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation