The validity of transverse intermaxillary analysis by traditional PA cephalometry compared with cone-beam computed tomography

Abstract

Abstract Aim: To assess the validity of using Jugale (J) and Antegonion (Ag) on Posterior-Anterior cephalograms (PAC) as landmarks for transverse intermaxillary analysis when compared with Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Material and methods: Conventional PAC and CBCT images were taken of 28 dry skulls. Craniometric measurements between the bilateral landmarks, Antegonion and Jugale, were obtained from the skulls using a microscribe and recorded as the base standard. The corresponding landmarks were identified and measured on CBCT and PAC and compared with the base standard measurements. The accuracy and reliability of the measurements were statistically evaluated and the validity was assessed by comparing the ability of the two image modalities to accurately diagnose an arbitrarily selected J-J/Ag-Ag ratio. All measurements were repeated at least 7 weeks apart. Intra-class correlations (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots were used to analyse the data. Results: All three methods were shown to be reliable as all had a mean error of less than 0.5 mm between repeated measurements. When compared with the base standard, CBCT measurements were shown to have higher agreement (ICC: 0.861-0.964) compared with measurements taken from PAC (ICC: 0.794-0.796). When the arbitrary J-J/Ag-Ag ratio was assessed, 18 per cent of cases were incorrectly diagnosed with a transverse discrepancy on the PAC compared with the CBCT which incorrectly diagnosed 8.7 per cent. Conclusion: CBCT was shown to be more reliable in assessing intermaxillary transverse discrepancy compared with PAC when using J-J/Ag-Ag ratios.