Carla Maria Melleiro Gimenez, Francisco Antonio Bertoz, Marisa Aparecida Cabrini Gabrielli, Oswaldo Magro Filho, Idelmo Garcia, Valfrido Antonio Pereira Filho
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare by means of McNamara as well as Legan and Burstone?s cephalometric analyses, both manual and digitized (by Dentofacial Planner Plus and Dolphin Image software) prediction tracings to post-surgical results. Methods: Pre and post-surgical teleradiographs (6 months) of 25 long face patients subjected to combined orthognathic surgery were selected. Manual and computerized prediction tracings of each patient were performed and cephalometrically compared to post-surgical outcomes. This protocol was repeated in order to evaluate the method error and statistical evaluation was conducted by means of analysis of variance and Tukey?s test. Results: A higher frequency of cephalometric variables, which were not statistically different from the actual post-surgical results for the manual method, was observed. It was followed by DFPlus and Dolphin software; in which similar cephalometric values for most variables were observed. Conclusion: It was concluded that the manual method seemed more reliable, although the predictability of the evaluated methods (computerized and manual) proved to be reasonably satisfactory and similar.
Keywords: Corrective orthodontics. Predictive value of tests. Oral surgery. Face.
Wednesday, December 12, 2018 10:19