Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the asymmetry index determined on digital panoramic radiographic images and on posteroanterior cephalometric images: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Vergleich von auf digitalen Panoramaröntgenbildern und posteroanterioren Fernröntgenbildern ermittelten Asymmetrieindizes: eine retrospektive Querschnittstudie

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare the asymmetry index determined on digital panoramic radiographic (PR) images and posteroanterior cephalometric (PACR) images.

Methods

This study included 100 patients whose PR and PACR images were registered in a database. Condylar height, ramus height, and condylar height plus ramus height measurements were measured bilaterally. Condylar asymmetry, ramus asymmetry, and total asymmetry were evaluated.

Results

There was a statistically significant difference between the right and left side for all measurements when evaluated on the PR and also on the PACR images (p < 0.01). When calculating the asymmetry index, the resulting condylar asymmetry and ramus asymmetry values did not show significant differences between PR and PACR images. On the other hand, only the presence of total asymmetry showed a statistically significant difference between techniques (p = 0.013).

Conclusion

Asymmetry indices can be reliably obtained from both PR and PACR images.

Zusammenfassung

Zielsetzung

Ziel dieser Studie war es, den anhand von digitalen Panoramaröntgenbildern (PR) mit dem anhand von posteroanterioren Fernröntgenbildern (PACR) ermittelten Asymmetrieindex zu vergleichen.

Methoden

An dieser Studie nahmen 100 Patienten teil, deren PR- und PACR-Aufnahmen in einer Datenbank registriert waren. Kondylenhöhe, Ramushöhe und Kondylenhöhe plus Ramushöhe wurden beidseitig gemessen. Kondylenasymmetrie, Ramusasymmetrie und Gesamtasymmetrie wurden bewertet.

Ergebnisse

Bei allen Messungen gab es einen statistisch signifikanten Unterschied zwischen der rechten und der linken Seite, sowohl bei der Auswertung der PR- als auch der PACR-Aufnahmen (p < 0,01). Bei der Berechnung des Asymmetrieindexes zeigten die resultierenden Werte für die Kondylenasymmetrie und die Ramusasymmetrie keine signifikanten Unterschiede zwischen PR- und PACR-Aufnahmen. Andererseits zeigte nur das Vorhandensein einer Gesamtasymmetrie einen statistisch signifikanten Unterschied zwischen den Techniken (p = 0,013).

Schlussfolgerung

Asymmetrieindizes können sowohl aus PR- als auch aus PACR-Aufnahmen zuverlässig ermittelt werden.

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 Abb. 1
Fig. 2 Abb. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anistoroaei D, Golovcencu L, Saveanu IC, Zegan G (2014) The prevalence of facial asymmetry in preorthodontic treatment. Int J Med Dent 18(3):210–215

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sezgin OS, Celenk P, Arici S (2007) Mandibular asymmetry in different occlusion patterns. Angle Orthod 77(5):803–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Agrawal A, Bagga DK, Agrawal P, Bhutani RK (2015) An evaluation of panoramic radiograph to assess mandibular asymmetry as compared to posteroanterior cephalogram. APOS Trends Orthod 5(5):197–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ramirez-Yanez GO, Stewart A, Franken E, Campos K (2011) Prevalence of mandibular asymmetries in growing patients. Eur J Orthod 33(3):236–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rose JM, Sadowsky C, BeGole EA, Moles R (1994) Mandibular skeletal and dental asymmetry in class II subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 105(5):489–495

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Westesson PL, Tallents RH, Katzberg RW, Guay JA (1994) Radiographic assessment of asymmetry of the mandible. Ajnr Am J Neuroradiol 15(5):991–999

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Vitral RW, Telles Cde S (2002) Computed tomography evaluation of temporomandibular joint alterations in class II division 1 subdivision patients: condylar symmetry. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 121(4):369–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Huang M, Hu Y, Yu J, Sun J, Ming Y, Zheng L (2017) Cone-beam computed tomographic evaluation of the temporomandibular joint and dental characteristics of patients with class II subdivision malocclusion and asymmetry. Korean J Orthod 47(5):277–288

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Habets LL, Bezuur JN, Naeiji M, Hansson TL (1988) The orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of temporomandibular joint problems. II. The vertical symmetry. J Oral Rehabil 15(5):465–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Almasan OC, Baciut M, Hedesiu M, Bran S, Almasan H, Baciut G (2013) Posteroanterior cephalometric changes in subjects with temporomandibular joint disorders. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 42(1):20120039

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Alkis HT, Bilge OM (2019) Evaluation of mandibular asymmetry in angle malocclusion samples by posterioanterior cephalometric radiography: a preliminary study. Niger J Clin Pract 22(6):771–776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kiki A, Kilic N, Oktay H (2007) Condylar asymmetry in bilateral posterior crossbite patients. Angle Orthod 77(1):77–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kurt G, Uysal T, Sisman Y, Ramoglu SI (2008) Mandibular asymmetry in class II subdivision malocclusion. Angle Orthod 78(1):32–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kjellberg H, Ekestubbe A, Kiliaridis S, Thilander B (1994) Condylar height on panoramic radiographs. A methodologic study with a clinical application. Acta Odontol Scand 52(1):43–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Habets LL, Bezuur JN, van Ooij CP, Hansson TL (1987) The orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of temporomandibular joint problems. I. The factor of vertical magnification. J Oral Rehabil 14(5):475–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Iturriaga V, Navarro P, Cantin M, Fuentes R (2012) Prevalence of vertical condilar asymmetry of the temporomandibular joint in patients with signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorder. Int J Morphol 30(1):315–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Uysal T, Sisman Y, Kurt G, Ramoglu SI (2009) Condylar and ramal vertical asymmetry in unilateral and bilateral posterior crossbite patients and a normal occlusion sample. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136(1):37–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kasimoglu Y, Tuna EB, Rahimi B, Marsan G, Gencay K (2015) Condylar asymmetry in different occlusion types. Cranio 33(1):10–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Silvestrini-Biavati F, Ugolini A, Laffi N, Canevello C, Silvestrini-Biavati A (2014) Early diagnostic evaluation of mandibular symmetry using orthopantomogram. Indian J Dent Res 25(2):154–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kilic N, Kiki A, Oktay H (2008) Condylar asymmetry in unilateral posterior crossbite patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 133(3):382–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Al Taki A, Ahmed MH, Ghani HA, Al Kaddah F (2015) Impact of different malocclusion types on the vertical mandibular asymmetry in young adult sample. Eur J Dent 9(3):373–377

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Trpkova B, Prasad NG, Lam EW, Raboud D, Glover KE, Major PW (2003) Assessment of facial asymmetries from posteroanterior cephalograms: validity of reference lines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 123(5):512–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Eliasson S, Welander U, Ahlqvist J (1982) The cephalographic projection. Part I: general considerations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 11(2):117–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grummons DC, Kappeyne van de Coppello MA (1987) A frontal asymmetry analysis. J Clin Orthod 21(7):448–465

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Major PW, Johnson DE, Hesse KL, Glover KE (1994) Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics. Angle Orthod 64(6):447–454

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Leonardi R, Annunziata A, Caltabiano M (2008) Landmark identification error in posteroanterior cephalometric radiography. A systematic review. Angle Orthod 78(4):761–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Houston WJ (1983) The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 83(5):382–390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Statistical analysis of this study was carried out by the Akdeniz University Statistical Consulting, Application and Research Center.

Funding

This study was not supported by any source of funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, University of Akdeniz, Antalya, Turkey

    Humeyra Tercanli Alkis PhD

  2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, University of Karabuk, Demir Çelik Campus, Karabuk, Turkey

    Kader Azlag Pekince Assistant Professor

Authors
  1. Humeyra Tercanli Alkis PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kader Azlag Pekince Assistant Professor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kader Azlag Pekince Assistant Professor.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

H.T. Alkis and K.A. Pekince declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

This study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine Akdeniz University, and the study was carried out in accordance with the ethical rules of the Declaration of Helsinki (ethics approval number 70904504/90). Consent to participate: Due to retrospective study design and the anonymization of the patients’ data, written informed consent was not necessary.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alkis, H.T., Pekince, K.A. Comparison of the asymmetry index determined on digital panoramic radiographic images and on posteroanterior cephalometric images: a retrospective cross-sectional study. J Orofac Orthop 84 (Suppl 3), 244–250 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00442-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00442-2

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation