Literature DB >> 24678846

Variation in voxel value distribution and effect of time between exposures in six CBCT units.

R Spin-Neto1, E Gotfredsen, A Wenzel.   

Abstract

The aim of this study is to assess the variation in voxel value distribution in volumetric data sets obtained by six cone beam CT (CBCT) units, and the effect of time between exposures. Six CBCT units [Cranex(®) 3D (CRAN; Soredex Oy, Tuusula, Finland), Scanora(®) 3D (SCAN; Soredex Oy), NewTom™ 5G (NEWT; QR Srl, Verona, Italy), Promax(®) Dimax 3 (Planmeca Oy, Helsinki, Finland), i-CAT (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA) and 3D Accuitomo FPD80 (Morita, Kyoto, Japan)] were tested. Two volumetric data sets of a dry human skull embedded in acrylic were acquired by each CBCT unit in two sessions on separate days. Each session consisted of 20 exposures: 10 acquired with 30 min between exposures and 10 acquired immediately one after the other. CBCT data were exported as digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) files and converted to text files. The text files were re-organized to contain x-, y- and z-position and grey shade for each voxel. The files were merged to contain 1 record per voxel position, including the voxel values from the 20 exposures in a session. For each voxel, subtractions were performed between Data Set 1 and the remaining 19 data sets (1 - 2, 1 - 3, etc) in a session. Means, medians, ranges and standard deviations for grey shade variation in the subtraction data sets were calculated for each unit and session. For all CBCT units, variation in voxel values was observed throughout the 20 exposures. A "fingerprint" for the grey shade variation was observed for CRAN, SCAN and NEWT. For the other units, the variation was (apparently) randomly distributed. Large discrepancies in voxel value distribution are seen in CBCT images. This variation should be considered in studies that assess minute changes in CBCT images.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cone beam CT; grey shade distribution; voxel value

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24678846      PMCID: PMC4082261          DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20130376

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol        ISSN: 0250-832X            Impact factor:   2.419


  18 in total

1.  Reduction of the negative influence of patient motion on quality of CBCT scan.

Authors:  Tomáš Hanzelka; René Foltán; Edita Horká; Jiří Sedý
Journal:  Med Hypotheses       Date:  2010-08-30       Impact factor: 1.538

Review 2.  Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 2: clinical applications.

Authors:  A C Miracle; S K Mukherji
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 3.  Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles.

Authors:  A C Miracle; S K Mukherji
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Intraoral radiographic storage phosphor image mean pixel values and signal-to-noise ratio: effects of calibration.

Authors:  Y Hayakawa; A G Farman; M S Kelly; K Kuroyanagi
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  1998-11

Review 5.  Artefacts in CBCT: a review.

Authors:  R Schulze; U Heil; D Gross; D D Bruellmann; E Dranischnikow; U Schwanecke; E Schoemer
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Analysis of intensity variability in multislice and cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Olivia Nackaerts; Frederik Maes; Hua Yan; Paulo Couto Souza; Ruben Pauwels; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 5.977

7.  How accurate is CBCT in measuring bone density? A comparative CBCT-CT in vitro study.

Authors:  Michele Cassetta; Luigi Vito Stefanelli; Andrea Pacifici; Luciano Pacifici; Ersilia Barbato
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 3.932

8.  Sensor noise in direct digital imaging (the RadioVisioGraphy, Sens-a-Ray, and Visualix/Vixa systems) evaluated by subtraction radiography.

Authors:  A Wenzel
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1994-01

9.  Working with DICOM craniofacial images.

Authors:  Dan Grauer; Lucia S H Cevidanes; William R Proffit
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.650

10.  Signal-to-noise ratios of 6 intraoral digital sensors.

Authors:  A G Attaelmanan; E Borg; H G Gröndahl
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2001-05
View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable?

Authors:  R Pauwels; R Jacobs; S R Singer; M Mupparapu
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  An ex vivo study of automated motion artefact correction and the impact on cone beam CT image quality and interpretability.

Authors:  Rubens Spin-Neto; Louise H Matzen; Lars W Schropp; Thomas S Sørensen; Ann Wenzel
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  Metallic materials in the exomass impair cone beam CT voxel values.

Authors:  Amanda P Candemil; Benjamin Salmon; Deborah Q Freitas; Glaucia Mb Ambrosano; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Matheus L Oliveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Are metal artefact reduction algorithms effective to correct cone beam CT artefacts arising from the exomass?

Authors:  Amanda Pelegrin Candemil; Benjamin Salmon; Deborah Queiroz Freitas; Glaucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Matheus Lima Oliveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Standardized method to quantify the variation in voxel value distribution in patient-simulated CBCT data sets.

Authors:  R Spin-Neto; E Gotfredsen; A Wenzel
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Impact of movement and motion-artefact correction on image quality and interpretability in CBCT units with aligned and lateral-offset detectors.

Authors:  Gustavo Machado Santaella; Ann Wenzel; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Pedro Luiz Rosalen; Rubens Spin-Neto
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 2.419

7.  Evaluation of soft tissues simulant materials in cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Priscila A Lopes; Gustavo M Santaella; Carlos Augusto S Lima; Karla de Faria Vasconcelos; Francisco C Groppo
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  Influence of the exomass on the detection of simulated root fracture in cone-beam CT - an ex-vivo study.

Authors:  Amanda Pelegrin Candemil; Francesca Mangione; Karla Farias Vasconcelos; Anne Caroline Oenning; Reinhilde Jacobs; Deborah Queiroz Freitas; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Benjamin Salmon; Matheus Lima Oliveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 2.419

9.  Assessment of Random Error in Phantom Dosimetry with the Use of Error Simulation in Statistical Software.

Authors:  R C Hoogeveen; E P Martens; P F van der Stelt; W E R Berkhout
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Soft tissue coverage on the segmentation accuracy of the 3D surface-rendered model from cone-beam CT.

Authors:  J K Dusseldorp; H C Stamatakis; Y Ren
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-05-21       Impact factor: 3.573

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.