OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) and multislice CT (MSCT) for linear jaw bone measurements. STUDY DESIGN: An ex vivo formalin-fixed human maxilla was imaged with both CBCT (Accuitomo 3D; Morita, Kyoto, Japan) and MSCT (4-slice Somatom VolumeZoom and 16-slice Somatom Sensation 16; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The MSCT images were reconstructed using different reconstruction filters to optimize bone visualization (U70u and U90u for VolumeZoom, H30s and H60s for Sensation 16). Before scanning, triplets of small gutta-percha markers were glued onto the soft tissues overlying the maxillary bone on the top and on both sides of the alveolar ridge to define a set of reproducible linear measurements in 11 planes. Image measurements were performed by 2 observers. The gold standard was determined by means of physical measurements with a caliper by 3 observers. RESULTS: The accuracy of the linear measurements was 0.35 +/- 1.31 mm (U70u) and 0.06 +/- 1.23 mm (U90u) for the Somatom VolumeZoom, 0.24 +/- 1.20 mm (H60s) and 0.54 +/- 1.14 mm (H30s) for the Sensation 16, and -0.09 +/- 1.64 mm for the Accuitomo 3D. Statistical analysis with 2-way analysis of variance showed no significant inter- or intraobserver disagreement for the physical or the radiologic measurements. There was also no significant difference for the measurements on the different reconstruction filters. CONCLUSION: Both CBCT and MSCT yield submillimeter accuracy for linear measurements on an ex vivo specimen.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) and multislice CT (MSCT) for linear jaw bone measurements. STUDY DESIGN: An ex vivo formalin-fixed human maxilla was imaged with both CBCT (Accuitomo 3D; Morita, Kyoto, Japan) and MSCT (4-slice Somatom VolumeZoom and 16-slice Somatom Sensation 16; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The MSCT images were reconstructed using different reconstruction filters to optimize bone visualization (U70u and U90u for VolumeZoom, H30s and H60s for Sensation 16). Before scanning, triplets of small gutta-percha markers were glued onto the soft tissues overlying the maxillary bone on the top and on both sides of the alveolar ridge to define a set of reproducible linear measurements in 11 planes. Image measurements were performed by 2 observers. The gold standard was determined by means of physical measurements with a caliper by 3 observers. RESULTS: The accuracy of the linear measurements was 0.35 +/- 1.31 mm (U70u) and 0.06 +/- 1.23 mm (U90u) for the Somatom VolumeZoom, 0.24 +/- 1.20 mm (H60s) and 0.54 +/- 1.14 mm (H30s) for the Sensation 16, and -0.09 +/- 1.64 mm for the Accuitomo 3D. Statistical analysis with 2-way analysis of variance showed no significant inter- or intraobserver disagreement for the physical or the radiologic measurements. There was also no significant difference for the measurements on the different reconstruction filters. CONCLUSION: Both CBCT and MSCT yield submillimeter accuracy for linear measurements on an ex vivo specimen.
Authors: R Patcas; G Markic; L Müller; O Ullrich; T Peltomäki; C J Kellenberger; C A Karlo Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 2.419