Which intracranial plane can be used instead of the true horizontal plane?

<strong>Purpose:</strong> The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Frankfort horizontal (FH), sella-nasion horizontal (SN-h), optic, and orbitooccipital planes by assessing their variabilities relative to a true horizontal line (TrH) in Class 1, 2, and 3 patients. <strong>Materials and Methods:</strong> Eighty-one pre-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) (27 each from Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 based on ANB (°) were taken in the natural head position (NHP). NHP was created using a laser level creating the true vertical line and the TrH perpendicular to the true vertical. The inclinations of the anatomic reference planes were compared with the TrH. <strong>Results:</strong> The orbitooccipital and FH planes were closest to the TrH, with mean values of -0.55 ± 3.26 and -0.60 ± 3.67, respectively. The mean value for the SN-h was 3.33 ± 4.40, whereas the mean value for the optic plane was 4.46 ± 4.58. The ranges were high for all anatomic planes: -9.03° to 8.22° for the FH plane, -8.79° to 6.49° for the orbitooccipital plane, -9.87° to 13.16° for the SN-h, and -4.21° to 16.43° for the optic plane. No significant differences were found in relation to skeletal patterns (orbitooccipital plane; p=0.05, FH plane: p=0.115, SN-h; p=0.156, optic plane; p=0.063, respectively). Regarding sex, there was a significant difference in the optic plane in only Class 1 females (p=0.024). <strong>Conclusion:</strong> The FH and orbitooccipital planes are not the same TrH, but they are the closest reference planes. Variations in reference planes affect diagnosis and therapy.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
European Oral Research
Published
2025-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.202511501479
Primary Topic
Ophthalmology and Eye Disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Which intracranial plane can be used instead of the true horizontal plane?

Busra Beser, Merve Gonca, Zübeyde Kantemur
8 links
European Oral Research
Ophthalmology and Eye Disorders
article

Which intracranial plane can be used instead of the true horizontal plane?

Busra Beser, Merve Gonca, Zübeyde Kantemur
article en

Abstract

<strong>Purpose:</strong> The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Frankfort horizontal (FH), sella-nasion horizontal (SN-h), optic, and orbitooccipital planes by assessing their variabilities relative to a true horizontal line (TrH) in Class 1, 2, and 3 patients. <strong>Materials and Methods:</strong> Eighty-one pre-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) (27 each from Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 based on ANB (°) were taken in the natural head position (NHP). NHP was created using a laser level creating the true vertical line and the TrH perpendicular to the true vertical. The inclinations of the anatomic reference planes were compared with the TrH. <strong>Results:</strong> The orbitooccipital and FH planes were closest to the TrH, with mean values of -0.55 ± 3.26 and -0.60 ± 3.67, respectively. The mean value for the SN-h was 3.33 ± 4.40, whereas the mean value for the optic plane was 4.46 ± 4.58. The ranges were high for all anatomic planes: -9.03° to 8.22° for the FH plane, -8.79° to 6.49° for the orbitooccipital plane, -9.87° to 13.16° for the SN-h, and -4.21° to 16.43° for the optic plane. No significant differences were found in relation to skeletal patterns (orbitooccipital plane; p=0.05, FH plane: p=0.115, SN-h; p=0.156, optic plane; p=0.063, respectively). Regarding sex, there was a significant difference in the optic plane in only Class 1 females (p=0.024). <strong>Conclusion:</strong> The FH and orbitooccipital planes are not the same TrH, but they are the closest reference planes. Variations in reference planes affect diagnosis and therapy.

European Oral ResearchVol. 0(0)
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Ophthalmology and Eye Disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.