Academic Journal
Accuracy of 3D radiological skull measurements: reoriented sections and geometric correction versus caliper reference.
| Title: | Accuracy of 3D radiological skull measurements: reoriented sections and geometric correction versus caliper reference. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Nahir M; Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, 60250, Türkiye. mert.nahir@gmail.com., Sahin B; Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Türkiye. |
| Source: | BMC oral health [BMC Oral Health] 2026 Sep 25; Vol. 26 (1). Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 Sep 25. |
| Publication Type: | Journal Article; Comparative Study |
| Language: | English |
| Journal Info: | Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101088684 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1472-6831 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14726831 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Oral Health Subsets: MEDLINE |
| Imprint Name(s): | Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001- |
| MeSH Terms: | Imaging, Three-Dimensional*/methods , Imaging, Three-Dimensional*/statistics & numerical data , Cephalometry*/methods , Cephalometry*/statistics & numerical data , Skull*/diagnostic imaging , Skull*/anatomy & histology, Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods ; Humans ; Models, Anatomic ; Reproducibility of Results ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted |
| Abstract: | Purpose: Three-dimensional radiological imaging is important for disease diagnosis and surgical planning, yet its accuracy in anatomical length measurements remains challenging. Standard sections calculations often underestimate actual dimensions due to orthographic projection distortions. This study evaluates the accuracy of reoriented section measurements and formula-based calculations compared to standard sections and reference caliper verifications. Methods: A plastic human skull model was used for standardized length measurements. Five cranial dimensions (Ma-G, Ma-N, Ma-Rh, Ma-Ns, Ma-Me) were measured using a digital caliper as the reference. A computed tomography scan with a slice thickness of 0.625 mm was performed, and measurements were obtained from standard sections (sagittal, transverse, coronal), reoriented section, and formula-based calculations. Measurement agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and repeated-measures ANOVA. Results: Reoriented sections values (e.g., Ma-G: 13.18 ± 0.52 cm, Ma-N: 12.59 ± 0.24 cm) and formula-based calculations (e.g., Ma-G: 13.15 ± 0.26 cm, Ma-N: 12.61 ± 0.80 cm) closely matched caliper measurements (p > 0.05). In contrast, standard section parameters were significantly lower across all parameters (e.g., Ma-G sagittal: 12.03 ± 0.48 cm, p = 0.0005; coronal: 7.39 ± 0.56 cm, p < 0.0001). Bland-Altman analysis confirmed high agreement for reoriented sections and formula-based methods, whereas standard sections showed significant deviations (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Reoriented sections findings and formula-based calculations offer accuracy comparable to caliper measurements, while standard sections results consistently underestimate the reference caliper values. These findings highlight the limitations of standard-section approaches and suggest that alternative methods may improve anatomical assessment in 3D imaging. These techniques may help reduce measurement-related discrepancies in settings requiring precise anatomical assessment. Such precision may be relevant in fields such as orthodontics, orthopedics, and implant planning, where accurate anatomical measurements are important. (© 2026. The Author(s).) |
| Competing Interests: | Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, and ethical approval was not required as it did not involve any materials obtained from humans or animals. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests. |
| References: | Head Face Med. 2025 Nov 27;21(1):79. (PMID: 41310660) IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2021 Nov;40(11):3165-3177. (PMID: 34181536) J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2026 Mar;54(3):104453. (PMID: 41506104) Surg Radiol Anat. 2023 May;45(5):603-609. (PMID: 36964777) Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Jun;27(6):2747-2761. (PMID: 36631596) J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2025 Nov;53(11):1995-2004. (PMID: 40908211) Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:393-415. (PMID: 30328204) J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024 Dec;125(6):101803. (PMID: 38403243) Ann Plast Surg. 2017 Mar;78(3 Suppl 2):S139-S147. (PMID: 28195892) Surg Radiol Anat. 2023 Mar;45(3):241-246. (PMID: 36715709) Sci Rep. 2017 May 19;7(1):2157. (PMID: 28526831) Surg Radiol Anat. 2024 Jan;46(1):65-70. (PMID: 38055036) J Craniofac Surg. 2025 Jun 1;36(4):e411-e415. (PMID: 39656444) Ann Hum Biol. 2025 Dec;52(1):2536162. (PMID: 40793601) Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Apr 1;34(3):665–672. (PMID: 30934042) J Pediatr Soc North Am. 2025 May 23;12:100204. (PMID: 40756157) J Exp Orthop. 2024 Dec 15;11(4):e70109. (PMID: 39678020) Angle Orthod. 2025 Jan 1;95(1):57-77. (PMID: 39317376) BMC Oral Health. 2025 Feb 18;25(1):254. (PMID: 39966790) BMC Oral Health. 2025 Apr 18;25(1):584. (PMID: 40251521) BMC Med Imaging. 2023 Sep 14;23(1):125. (PMID: 37710172) Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2024 Oct;110(6):103908. (PMID: 38768810) BMC Oral Health. 2022 Mar 30;22(1):98. (PMID: 35351080) Surg Radiol Anat. 2024 Dec 16;47(1):32. (PMID: 39680212) Rev Sci Instrum. 2024 Jan 1;95(1):. (PMID: 38189650) |
| Contributed Indexing: | Keywords: Cephalometry; Image processing, computer-assisted; Imaging, three-dimensional; Skull; Tomography, X-ray computed |
| Entry Date(s): | Date Created: 20260928 Date Completed: 20260929 Latest Revision: 20260930 |
| Update Code: | 20260930 |
| PubMed Central ID: | PMC13617748 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12903-026-09969-x |
| PMID: | 42806346 |
| Database: | MEDLINE |
| ISSN: | 1472-6831 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12903-026-09969-x |