Comparative Evaluation of Digital Cephalometric Tracing Applications on Mobile Devices and Manual Tracing.

BACKGROUND Cephalometric radiography evaluates facial skeleton development and aids in diagnosis and treatment phases (pre and post) in orthodontics. This study aimed to compare digital cephalometric tracing using a smartphone application (App), a tablet-based platform, and manual tracing in 30 orthodontic patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty orthodontic pretreatment, criteria based, lateral cephalometric radiographs were analyzed/grouped for Steiner analysis parameters (5 skeletal, 3 dentals, 1 soft tissue) by 3 tracing methods [manual - group (Gp M), smartphone (Android - OS9) - Gp S, tablet (Apple - IOS13) - Gp T) after mandatory standardization/calibration. Measurements include 5 angular (SNA, SNB, ANB, SNMPA, SNOP), 3 linear U1NA, L1NB, U1L1, and 1 soft tissue (S line) (millimeters and degrees). Inter-examiner rating was determined using Dahlberg's test. After normality distribution testing (Shapiro-Wilk), data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for group differences. Homogeneity of variance was verified using the Levene test. Differences were determined on probability value of (p≤0.05). RESULTS The results showed that Steiner's analysis parameters were similar in all groups with homogenous variances. Highest differences in mean values were found for L1NB, U1L1, and S line measurement, with higher values being observed in Gp S tracings. However, these differences were not statistically significant (p≤0.05). All parameters, irrespective of being measured in either degrees or millimeters, had means comparable to each other. CONCLUSIONS Smartphone and tablet-based applications produced tracings that were comparable and reliable when compared to conventional manual tracings. Standardization of images, processing, printing, and calibration of devices is important to achieve good results.

Unilateral vs Bilateral Maxillary Canine Impaction: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study of Patterns and Associations.

AIM: This retrospective study aimed to compare and evaluate the pattern of maxillary canine impaction and its association with other anomalies using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: A total of 59 CBCT records of patients (ages 12 and up) were divided into two groups: A total of 35 subjects with unilateral canine impactions and 24 subjects with bilateral canine impactions. The CBCT data were analyzed for the measurement of qualitative and quantitative variables. RESULTS: In unilateral canine impaction, the mesiodistal (MD) width of the central incisors and the nasal cavity (NC) width were wider (p < 0.05). The canine-palatal plane (U3-PP) distance was significantly longer in bilateral canine impaction (p < 0.05). The distance of the impacted canines from the palatal and mid-sagittal planes, the anterior dental arch width, and the maxillary skeletal width changed significantly with the position of the impacted canines (p < 0.05). Males had 0.185 odds of presenting with a bilateral canine impaction as compared to females (p = 0.025). The odds of having bilateral canine impaction with a longer canine-midsagittal plane (U3-MSP) distance was 1.30 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate a gender predilection with females showing a greater prevalence of bilateral canine impaction. Supernumerary teeth were associated with unilateral impacted canines and lower canine impaction with bilaterally impacted canines. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Anomalies in the form of the maxillary central and lateral incisors, distance from the maxillary canine to the palatal plane and the mid-sagittal plane, NC width, maxillary skeletal width, and gender, are the best discriminating parameters between unilateral and bilateral canine impactions.