IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i13p4789-d379917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Imaging Software Accuracy for 3-Dimensional Analysis of the Mandibular Condyle. A Comparative Study Using a Surface-to-Surface Matching Technique

Author

Listed:
  • Antonino Lo Giudice

    (Department of General Surgery and Surgical-Medical Specialties, Section of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy)

  • Vincenzo Quinzi

    (Post Graduate School of Orthodontics, Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, V.le San Salvatore, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy)

  • Vincenzo Ronsivalle

    (Department of General Surgery and Surgical-Medical Specialties, Section of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy)

  • Marco Farronato

    (Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, Section of Orthodontics, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy)

  • Carmelo Nicotra

    (Department of General Surgery and Surgical-Medical Specialties, Section of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy)

  • Francesco Indelicato

    (Department of General Surgery and Surgical-Medical Specialties, Section of Oral Surgery and Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy)

  • Gaetano Isola

    (Department of General Surgery and Surgical-Medical Specialties, Section of Oral Surgery and Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of 3D rendering of the mandibular condylar region obtained from different semi-automatic segmentation methodology. A total of 10 Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) were selected to perform semi-automatic segmentation of the condyles by using three free-source software (Invesalius, version 3.0.0, Centro de Tecnologia da Informação Renato Archer, Campinas, SP, Brazil; ITK-Snap, version2.2.0; Slicer 3D, version 4.10.2) and one commercially available software Dolphin 3D (Dolphin Imaging, version 11.0, Chatsworth, CA, USA). The same models were also manually segmented (Mimics, version 17.01, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) and set as ground truth. The accuracy of semi-automatic segmentation was evaluated by (1) comparing the volume of each semi-automatic 3D rendered condylar model with that obtained with manual segmentation, (2) deviation analysis of each 3D rendered mandibular models with those obtained from manual segmentation. No significant differences were found in the volumetric dimensions of the condylar models among the tested software ( p > 0.05). However, the color-coded map showed underestimation of the condylar models obtained with ITK-Snap and Slicer 3D, and overestimation with Dolphin 3D and Invesalius. Excellent reliability was found for both intra-observer and inter-observer readings. Despite the excellent reliability, the present findings suggest that data of condylar morphology obtained with semi-automatic segmentation should be taken with caution when an accurate definition of condylar boundaries is required.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonino Lo Giudice & Vincenzo Quinzi & Vincenzo Ronsivalle & Marco Farronato & Carmelo Nicotra & Francesco Indelicato & Gaetano Isola, 2020. "Evaluation of Imaging Software Accuracy for 3-Dimensional Analysis of the Mandibular Condyle. A Comparative Study Using a Surface-to-Surface Matching Technique," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:13:p:4789-:d:379917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/13/4789/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/13/4789/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:13:p:4789-:d:379917. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.