Email Alert | RSS

北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2016, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (2): 330-335. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2016.02.028

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

3种生成大视野锥形束CT数据正中矢状面方法的比较

王斯维1，黎敏2，杨慧芳3，赵一姣3，王勇3，刘怡1△   

  1. （1.北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院正畸科， 北京 100081； 2.贵州医科大学附属医院口腔正畸科，贵阳 550001；
    3.北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室， 北京100081）
  • 出版日期:2016-04-18 发布日期:2016-04-18
  • 通讯作者: 刘怡 E-mail:lyortho@163.com
  • 基金资助:

    国家高技术研究发展计划（863计划, 2013AA040803）项目资助

Evaluation of three methods for constructing craniofacial mid-sagittal plane based on the cone beam computed tomography

WANG Si-wei1, LI Min2, YANG Hui-fang3, ZHAO Yi-jiao3, WANG Yong3, LIU Yi1△   

  1. (1.Department of Orthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China; 2. Department of Orthodontics, the Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang 550001, China; 3.National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China)
  • Online:2016-04-18 Published:2016-04-18
  • Contact: LIU Yi1 E-mail:lyortho@163.com
  • Supported by:

    Supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program, 2013AA040803）

PDF (PC)

摘要：

目的：比较迭代最近点法（interactive closet point,ICP）、普氏分析法（Procrustes analysis,PA）和点构法在确定大视野锥形束CT（cone beam computed tomography,CBCT）数据正中矢状面（mid-sagittal plane,MSP）的准确性，为大视野锥形束CT空间坐标系的建立和对称性分析提供理论依据。方法： 10名面部基本对称正畸患者进行大视野锥形束CT扫描，数据以DICOM格式保存输出，在Mimics10.0下完成数据分割获取数字化三维头颅，将所生成数字化头颅数据导入逆向工程软件geomagic studio 2012，对原始数据进行左右镜像，将原始和镜像后的三维头颅数据分别以ICP和PA进行配准，分别求得颅面结构正中矢状参考平面S1、S2。点构法是在InVivoDental 5.0软件下以蝶鞍点（sella, S）、鼻根点（nasion, N）、颅底点（basion, Ba）3点确定正中矢状参考平面S3，分别测量计算9对对称解剖标志点到上述3个参考平面的距离差值的绝对值，使用单因素方差分析比较3种方法生成正中矢状面的差异，并以LSD进行组间两两比较。结果： 在正位截图下观察，3种方法生成的正中矢状参考平面均可用于临床分析，单因素方差分析显示3种生成正中矢状参考平面的方法差异有统计学意义（F=10.932，P=0.001），LSD检验显示迭代最近点算法与点构法生成MSP差异无统计学意义（P=0.11），普氏分析算法与点构法生成MSP差异有统计学意义（P=0.01）。结论： 对于大视野锥形束CT数据，基于迭代最近点算法和普式分析算法计算可构建三维头颅的正中矢状参考平面，对于面部基本对称个体，迭代最近点算法与传统点构法所生成正中矢状参考平面无明显差异，具有临床可行性。

关键词: 正中矢状面, 锥束计算机体层摄影术, 算法

Abstract:

Objective：To compare the accuracyof interactive closet point (ICP) algorithm, Procrustes analysis (PA) algorithm,andalandmark-independent method to construct the mid-sagittal plane (MSP) of the cone beam computed tomography.To provide theoretical basis for establishing coordinate systemof CBCT images and symmetric analysis. Methods: Ten patients were selected and scanned by CBCT before orthodontic treatment.The scan data was imported into Mimics 10.0 to reconstructthree dimensional skulls.And the MSP of each skull was generated by ICP algorithm, PA algorithm and landmark-independent method. MSP extracted by ICP algorithm or PA algorithm involvedthree steps. First, the 3D skull processing was performed by reverse engineering software geomagic studio 2012 to obtain the mirror skull. Then, the original and its mirror skull was registered separately by ICP algorithm in geomagic studio 2012 and PA algorithm in NX Imageware 11.0. Finally, the registered data were united into new data to calculate the MSP of the originaldata in geomagic studio 2012. The mid-sagittal plane was determined by SELLA (S), nasion (N), basion (Ba) as traditional landmark-dependent methodconducted in software InVivoDental 5.0. The distance from 9 pairs of symmetric anatomical marked points to three sagittal plane were measured and calculated to compare the differences of the absolute value. The one-way ANOVA test was used to analyze the variable differences among the 3 MSPs. The pairwise comparison was performed with LSD method. Results: MSPs calculated by the three methods were available for clinic analysis, which could be concluded from the front view.However, there was significant differences among the distances from the 9 pairs of symmetric anatomical marked points to the MSPs (F=10.932，P=0.001).LSD test showed there was no significant difference between the ICP algorithm and landmark-independent method (P=0.11), while there was significant difference between the PA algorithm and landmark-independent methods (P=0.01) .Conclusion: Mid-sagittal plane of 3D skulls could be generated base on ICP algorithm or PA algorithm. There was no significant difference between the ICP algorithm and landmark-independent method. For the subjects with no evident asymmetry, ICP algorithm is feasible in clinical analysis.

Key words: Mid-sagittal plane, Cone-beam computed tomography, Algorithms

中图分类号: 

  • R814.42
[1] 凌晓彤,屈留洋,郑丹妮,杨静,闫雪冰,柳登高,高岩. 牙源性钙化囊肿与牙源性钙化上皮瘤的三维影像特点[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 131-137.
[2] 段登辉,WANGHom-Lay,王恩博. 可吸收胶原膜在颊侧袋形瓣引导性骨再生手术中的作用: 一项回顾性影像学队列研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(6): 1097-1104.
[3] 杨刚,胡文杰,曹洁,柳登高. 牙周健康的上颌前牙唇侧嵴顶上牙龈的三维形态分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 990-994.
[4] 高璐,谷岩. 中国人群腭中缝形态特点分期与Demirjian牙龄的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 133-138.
[5] 瞿经纬，吕肖庆，刘振明，廖媛，孙鹏晖，王蓓，汤帜. 一种基于图塌缩的药物分子检索方法[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(2): 368-374.
[6] 贾鹏程，杨刚，胡文杰，赵一姣，刘木清. 根尖片评估单根牙骨内牙根表面积的准确性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(1): 91-97.
[7] 马静，江久汇. 骨性Ⅱ类和Ⅲ类高角错牙合患者下切牙区的牙槽骨形态分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(1): 98-103.
[8] 徐筱，徐莉，江久汇，吴佳琪，李小彤，靖无迪. 锥形束CT评判安氏Ⅲ类错牙合上前牙骨开裂与骨开窗的准确性分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(1): 104-109.
[9] 曹婕1，孟焕新. 锥形束CT用于评估牙槽骨骨缺损的情况和骨再生区域骨密度的变化[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(1): 110-116.
[10] 常大桐，周彦恒，刘伟涛. 上颌反复快速扩缩对上气道影响的锥束CT研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(4): 685-690.
[11] 陈全，张晓1张智勇，高巍，刘文曙，孟甜，陈宇寰，王慧丽. 上颌窦前外侧壁骨内血管孔道位置锥形束CT影像判断分析及其临床应对措施[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(3): 540-546.
[12] 赵一姣，王斯维，刘怡，王勇. 基于影像学牙周膜解剖特征快速提取活体牙三维牙根形态的方法[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 54-059.
[13] 苏征，白雨豪，侯晓玫. 不同技术对弯曲根管根尖气锁去除效果的锥形束CT研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 76-080.
[14] 温馥嘉，陈贵，刘怡. 基于锥形束CT的强支抗内收上前牙病例牙根及牙槽骨的形态学分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(4): 702-708.
[15] 张茗茗，梁宇红，高学军. 根尖X线片和锥形束CT评价根尖周骨病变的比较研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(3): 539-543.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
ISSN 1671-167X
CN 11-4691/R
主管单位：中华人民共和国教育部
主办单位：北京大学
地址： 北京市海淀区学院路38号 北京大学医学部 《北京大学学报（医学版）》
邮编：100191
电话：010-82801551
Email： xbbjb2@bjmu.edu.cn

《北京大学学报（医学版）》
微信公众号
版权所有 © 2018 《北京大学学报（医学版）》编辑部