Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis
Objectives Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral investigations 2022-01, Vol.26 (1), p.353-364 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 364 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 353 |
container_title | Clinical oral investigations |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Doberschütz, Philine Henriette Schwahn, Christian Krey, Karl-Friedrich |
description | Objectives
Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations.
Materials/methods
Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability.
Results
Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility.
Conclusions
The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area.
Clinical Relevance
The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8791903</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2622860713</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9d14f82323071baa98e163f16df393c1ad9bb21a661648f776d133d0adf2300c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UcuO1DAQjBCIXRZ-gAOyxIVLwK9xEg5IMMtLWokLnK2O057xyomD7Vlpb3wDN35vvwRnZhkeBy52t7uq2qWqqseMPmeUNi9SOVpZU85qKilVtbhTnTIpStE07O6-5rXqWnZSPUjpklImVSPuVydC0hWVfHVafV_jvAUfRszRGQIT-OuEidgQifFoM5khO5xyekmApFyalJ0BT2CeYwCzJTkQE8YZIpK8RXIF0UHvi0aw5Bw9uIg3334kYiJMLlgwbmHvF7m0sN9g3OB0fHpY3bPgEz66vc-qL-_efl5_qC8-vf-4fn1RG9nIXHcDk7blggvasB6ga5EpYZkarOiEYTB0fc8ZKMWUbG3TqIEJMVAYbKFQI86qVwfdedePOJhiMoLXc3QjxGsdwOm_J5Pb6k240m3TsY6KIvDsViCGrztMWY8uGfQeJgy7pPlKSMXKLlqgT_-BXoZdLIYLSnHequJhEeQHlIkhpYj2-BlG9RK5PkSuS-R6H7leSE_-tHGk_Mq4AMQBkMpo2mD8vfs_sj8BIvG60g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2622860713</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette ; Schwahn, Christian ; Krey, Karl-Friedrich</creator><creatorcontrib>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette ; Schwahn, Christian ; Krey, Karl-Friedrich</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations.
Materials/methods
Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability.
Results
Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility.
Conclusions
The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area.
Clinical Relevance
The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1432-6981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34050425</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Cephalometry ; Cleft Lip - diagnostic imaging ; Cleft lip/palate ; Cleft Palate - diagnostic imaging ; Correlation analysis ; Dentistry ; Factor analysis ; Humans ; Medicine ; Original ; Original Article ; Patients ; Reproducibility ; Reproducibility of Results ; Skull ; Statistics ; Variables</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral investigations, 2022-01, Vol.26 (1), p.353-364</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>2021. The Author(s).</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9d14f82323071baa98e163f16df393c1ad9bb21a661648f776d133d0adf2300c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9d14f82323071baa98e163f16df393c1ad9bb21a661648f776d133d0adf2300c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1120-8398</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34050425$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwahn, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krey, Karl-Friedrich</creatorcontrib><title>Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis</title><title>Clinical oral investigations</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Invest</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><description>Objectives
Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations.
Materials/methods
Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability.
Results
Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility.
Conclusions
The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area.
Clinical Relevance
The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients.</description><subject>Cephalometry</subject><subject>Cleft Lip - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Cleft lip/palate</subject><subject>Cleft Palate - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Factor analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Reproducibility</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Skull</subject><subject>Statistics</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>1432-6981</issn><issn>1436-3771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UcuO1DAQjBCIXRZ-gAOyxIVLwK9xEg5IMMtLWokLnK2O057xyomD7Vlpb3wDN35vvwRnZhkeBy52t7uq2qWqqseMPmeUNi9SOVpZU85qKilVtbhTnTIpStE07O6-5rXqWnZSPUjpklImVSPuVydC0hWVfHVafV_jvAUfRszRGQIT-OuEidgQifFoM5khO5xyekmApFyalJ0BT2CeYwCzJTkQE8YZIpK8RXIF0UHvi0aw5Bw9uIg3334kYiJMLlgwbmHvF7m0sN9g3OB0fHpY3bPgEz66vc-qL-_efl5_qC8-vf-4fn1RG9nIXHcDk7blggvasB6ga5EpYZkarOiEYTB0fc8ZKMWUbG3TqIEJMVAYbKFQI86qVwfdedePOJhiMoLXc3QjxGsdwOm_J5Pb6k240m3TsY6KIvDsViCGrztMWY8uGfQeJgy7pPlKSMXKLlqgT_-BXoZdLIYLSnHequJhEeQHlIkhpYj2-BlG9RK5PkSuS-R6H7leSE_-tHGk_Mq4AMQBkMpo2mD8vfs_sj8BIvG60g</recordid><startdate>20220101</startdate><enddate>20220101</enddate><creator>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette</creator><creator>Schwahn, Christian</creator><creator>Krey, Karl-Friedrich</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1120-8398</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220101</creationdate><title>Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis</title><author>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette ; Schwahn, Christian ; Krey, Karl-Friedrich</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9d14f82323071baa98e163f16df393c1ad9bb21a661648f776d133d0adf2300c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Cephalometry</topic><topic>Cleft Lip - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Cleft lip/palate</topic><topic>Cleft Palate - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Factor analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Reproducibility</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Skull</topic><topic>Statistics</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwahn, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krey, Karl-Friedrich</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Doberschütz, Philine Henriette</au><au>Schwahn, Christian</au><au>Krey, Karl-Friedrich</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle><stitle>Clin Oral Invest</stitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><date>2022-01-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>353</spage><epage>364</epage><pages>353-364</pages><issn>1432-6981</issn><eissn>1436-3771</eissn><abstract>Objectives
Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations.
Materials/methods
Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability.
Results
Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility.
Conclusions
The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area.
Clinical Relevance
The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>34050425</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1120-8398</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1432-6981 |
ispartof | Clinical oral investigations, 2022-01, Vol.26 (1), p.353-364 |
issn | 1432-6981 1436-3771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8791903 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Cephalometry Cleft Lip - diagnostic imaging Cleft lip/palate Cleft Palate - diagnostic imaging Correlation analysis Dentistry Factor analysis Humans Medicine Original Original Article Patients Reproducibility Reproducibility of Results Skull Statistics Variables |
title | Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T10%3A47%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cephalometric%20analyses%20for%20cleft%20patients:%20a%20statistical%20approach%20to%20compare%20the%20variables%20of%20Delaire%E2%80%99s%20craniofacial%20analysis%20to%20Bergen%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20investigations&rft.au=Dobersch%C3%BCtz,%20Philine%20Henriette&rft.date=2022-01-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=353&rft.epage=364&rft.pages=353-364&rft.issn=1432-6981&rft.eissn=1436-3771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2622860713%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2622860713&rft_id=info:pmid/34050425&rfr_iscdi=true |