Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on posteroanterior digital radiographs using DICOM and JPEG formats

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the influence of DICOM and JPEG formats on the reproducibility of identification of cephalometric landmarks on posteroanterior digital radiographs.

Methods

The sample consisted of digital images of posteroanterior radiographs saved in DICOM format; they were subsequently converted into JPEG format with quality factors of 100, 80, and 60. After sample blinding, 18 cephalometric points were identified on each image by three calibrated orthodontists using a system of x- and y-axis Cartesian coordinates. The intraclass correlation test was applied to analyze the occurrence of systematic errors, and Dahlberg’s formula was used to calculate casual errors. The reproducibility between the DICOM and JPEG formats was compared by analysis of variance. All tests were conducted with a significance level of 5 %.

Results

Each examiner repeated the procedure 30 days after the initial test with 20 % of the images, which were randomly selected, in each file format. We found that the cephalometric landmarks in the posteroanterior digital radiographs presented intraexaminer and interexaminer reproducibility; the exceptions were points ZL, ZR, AZ, JR, NC, and CN in the y-axis and A6 in the x-axis, which were due to intraclass correlations under 0.90 and casual error over 1.0 mm, irrespective of file format (DICOM or JPEG).

Conclusions

The DICOM and JPEG file formats and quality factors of 100, 80, and 60 did not affect the intraexaminer and interexaminer reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Graham RNJ, Perriss RW, Scarsbrook AF. DICOM demystified: a review of digital file formats and their use in radiological practice. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:1133–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Obrul D, Liu Y, Zalik B. Progressive visualization of losslessly compressed DICOM files over the Internet. J Med Syst. 2012;36:1927–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Analoui M, Buckwalter K. Digital radiographic image archival, retrieval, and management. Dent Clin North Am. 2000;44:339–58, vi–vii.

  4. Sung MM, Kim HJ, Yoo SK, Choi BW, Nam JE, Kim HS, et al. Clinical evaluation of compression ratios using JPEG2000 on computed radiography chest images. J Digit Imaging. 2002;15:78–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Baumrind S, Frantz RC. The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod. 1971;60:111–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, Roberts CT. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs, Part 2: image quality. Angle Orthod. 1996;66:43–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E. Digital radiography for the orthodontist. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121:231–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Major PW, Johnson DE, Hesse KL, Glover KE. Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics. Angle Orthod. 1994;64:447–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ricketts RM, Bench RW, Hilgers JJ, Schulhof R. An overview of computerized cephalometrics. Am J Orthod. 1972;61:1–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wenger NA, Tewson DH, McDonald F. Direct digital lateral cephalometry: the effects of JPEG compression on image quality. Med Eng Phys. 2006;28:560–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fleiss JL. The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York: Wiley; 1999.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. 1st ed. New York: Interscience Publication; 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Houston WJ. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod. 1983;83:382–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Neter J, Li W. Applied linear statistical models. 5th ed. New York: Mcgraw-Hill; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zar JH. Biostatistical analysis. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Akdeniz BG, Gröndahl HG. Degradation of storage phosphor images due to scanning delay. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:74–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hildebolt CF, Couture RA, Whiting BR. Dental photostimulable phosphor radiography. Dent Clin North Am. 2000;44:273–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Martins MG, Whaites EJ, Ambrosano GM. Haiter Neto F. What happens if you delay scanning Digora phosphor storage plates (PSPs) for up to 4 hours? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:143–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fidler A, Likar B, Skaleric U. Lossy JPEG compression: easy to compress, hard to compare. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:67–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fidler A, Skaleric U, Likar B. The effect of image content on detail preservation and file size reduction in lossy compression. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:387–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Duarte H, Vieck R, Siqueira DF, Angelieri F, Bommarito S, Dalben G, et al. Effect of image compression of digital lateral cephalograms on the reproducibility of cephalometric points. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Midtgård J, Björk G, Linder-Aronson S. Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks and errors of measurements of cephalometric cranial distances. Angle Orthod. 1974;44:56–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Stabrun AE, Danielsen K. Precision in cephalometric landmark identification. Eur J Orthod. 1982;4:185–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Athanasiou AE, Miethke R, Van Der Meij AJ. Random errors in localization of landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms. Br J Orthod. 1999;26:273–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. El-Mangoury NH, Shaheen SI, Mostafa YA. Landmark identification in computerized posteroanterior cephalometrics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;91:57–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cziraki SE, Pharoah MJ, Lawrence HP, Petrikowski CG, Birek P, Rossouw PE. The reproducibility and accuracy of cephalometric analysis using different digital imaging modalities and image compression. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;122:118–9.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Buschang PH, Tanguay R, Demirjian A. Cephalometric reliability. A full ANOVA model for the estimation of true and error variance. Angle Orthod. 1987;57:168–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Richardson ME. The reproducibility of measurements on depressed posteroanterior cephalometric radiographs. Angle Orthod. 1967;37:48–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Leonardi R, Annunziata A, Caltabiano M. Landmark identification error in posteroanterior cephalometric radiography. A systematic review. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:761–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthodontic Post Graduate Program, São Paulo Methodist University Dental School, Rua Planalto, 106, Rudge Ramos, São Bernardo do Campo, São Paulo, 09640-060, Brazil

    Daniel Martinez Saez

  2. Speech Therapy Department, São Paulo Federal University, Rua Botucatu, 796, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, 04023-900, Brazil

    Silvana Bommarito

  3. Imaging Diagnostic Department, Medical School, São Paulo Federal University, Rua Napoleão de Barros, 800, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, 04024-002, Brazil

    Eduardo Kazuo Sannomiya

Authors
  1. Daniel Martinez Saez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Silvana Bommarito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eduardo Kazuo Sannomiya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduardo Kazuo Sannomiya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Daniel Martinez Saez, Silvana Bommarito, and Eduardo Kazuo Sannomiya declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human rights statements and informed consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saez, D.M., Bommarito, S. & Sannomiya, E.K. Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on posteroanterior digital radiographs using DICOM and JPEG formats. Oral Radiol 32, 79–86 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0217-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0217-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation