Estudio comparativo entre las superposiciones cefalométricas trazadas manual y digitalmente con Dolphin® y Nemoceph®.¿Existen diferencias?

Resumo

Introduction: Cephalometric superimposition analyses are fundamental to evaluate skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes after the orthodontic treatment. Currently we have computer software that performs these cephalometric superimpositions automatically. Objectives: First, to compare the measurements made between manual cephalometric analysis and the results with two different digital cephalometric software and; second, to evaluate the results regarding the reproducibility with both methods. Material and methods: A retrospective study approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Valencia was performed. Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalographs of 40 patients who attended treatment at the Master of Orthodontic Surgery at the University of Valencia were collected. The mean age was 18.8 years. All patients had undergone a lateral cranial radiography before (T1) and after (T2) orthodontic treatment, made in the same x-ray machine and under the same conditions. The procedure was to trace Ricketts cephalometric analysis before and after orthodontic treatment by traditional/manual and digitally, using two cephalometric softwares (Dolphin® and Nemoceph®). Intra- and interobserver error was calculated to measure the reproducibility of the measurements. Results: The manual method is shown with almost perfect values, similar to the results obtained by Nemoceph®. Dolphin® software was the program where variations between initial and final measurements were mostly found. Conclusions: The digital cephalometric software, Dolphin® was the program with more variations between initial and final measurements, while the Nemoceph® cephalometric software was the one with the best final results. (Rev Esp Ortod. 2015;45(3):142-149)