Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Dec:24 Suppl 2:59-67.
doi: 10.1111/ocr.12493. Epub 2021 Jun 27.

Accuracy of automated identification of lateral cephalometric landmarks using cascade convolutional neural networks on lateral cephalograms from nationwide multi-centres

Affiliations

Accuracy of automated identification of lateral cephalometric landmarks using cascade convolutional neural networks on lateral cephalograms from nationwide multi-centres

Jaerong Kim et al. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2021 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the accuracy of automated identification of cephalometric landmarks using the cascade convolutional neural networks (CNN) on lateral cephalograms acquired from nationwide multi-centres.

Settings and sample population: A total of 3150 lateral cephalograms were acquired from 10 university hospitals in South Korea for training.

Materials and methods: We evaluated the accuracy of the developed model with independent 100 lateral cephalograms as an external validation. Two orthodontists independently identified the anatomic landmarks of the test data set using the V-ceph software (version 8.0, Osstem, Seoul, Korea). The mean positions of the landmarks identified by two orthodontists were regarded as the gold standard. The performance of the CNN model was evaluated by calculating the mean absolute distance between the gold standard and the automatically detected positions. Factors associated with the detection accuracy for landmarks were analysed using the linear regression models.

Results: The mean inter-examiner difference was 1.31 ± 1.13 mm. The overall automated detection error was 1.36 ± 0.98 mm. The mean detection error for each landmark ranged between 0.46 ± 0.37 mm (maxillary incisor crown tip) and 2.09 ± 1.91 mm (distal root tip of the mandibular first molar). A significant difference in the detection accuracy among cephalograms was noted according to hospital (P = .011), sensor type (P < .01), and cephalography machine model (P < .01).

Conclusion: The automated cephalometric landmark detection model may aid in preliminary screening for patient diagnosis and mid-treatment assessment, independent of the type of the radiography machines tested.

Keywords: anatomic landmarks; artificial intelligence; convolutional neural networks; deep learning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. Kaur A, Singh C. Automatic cephalometric landmark detection using Zernike moments and template matching. Signal Image Video Process. 2015;9(1):117-132.
    1. Grau V, Alcaniz M, Juan M, Monserrat C, Knoll C. Automatic localization of cephalometric landmarks. J Biomed Inform. 2001;34(3):146-156.
    1. Ferreira JTL, Telles CDS. Evaluation of the reliability of computerized profile cephalometric analysis. Braz Dent J. 2002;13(3):201-204.
    1. Tweed CH. The Frankfort-mandibular plane angle in orthodontic diagnosis, classification, treatment planning, and prognosis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1946;32(4):175-230.
    1. Downs WB. Variations in facial relationships: their significance in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod. 1948;34(10):812-840.

LinkOut - more resources