C Leiva-Salinas1, L Flors2, P Gras3, F Más-Estellés4, P Lemercier5, J T Patrie6, M Wintermark7, L Martí-Bonmatí8. 1. From the Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., F.M.-E., P.L., L.M.-B.) Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., M.W.) carlosleivasalinas@gmail.com. 2. From the Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., F.M.-E., P.L., L.M.-B.) Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., M.W.). 3. Physics (P.G.). 4. From the Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., F.M.-E., P.L., L.M.-B.) ERESA (F.M.-E.). 5. From the Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., F.M.-E., P.L., L.M.-B.). 6. Public Health Sciences (J.T.P.), University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. 7. Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., M.W.). 8. From the Departments of Radiology and Medical Imaging (C.L.-S., L.F., F.M.-E., P.L., L.M.-B.) GIBI Research Group (L.M.-B.), Hospital Universitario y Politécnico la Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CT is the imaging modality of choice to study the paranasal sinuses; unfortunately, it involves significant radiation dose. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic validity, image quality, and radiation-dose savings of dental conebeam CT in the evaluation of patients with suspected inflammatory disorders of the paranasal sinuses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively studied 40 patients with suspected inflammatory disorders of the sinuses with dental conebeam CT and standard CT. Two radiologists analyzed the images independently, blinded to clinical information. The image quality of both techniques and the diagnostic validity of dental conebeam CT compared with the reference standard CT were assessed by using 3 different scoring systems. Image noise, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio were calculated for both techniques. The absorbed radiation dose to the lenses and thyroid and parotid glands was measured by using a phantom and dosimeter chips. The effective radiation dose for CT was calculated. RESULTS: All dental conebeam CT scans were judged of diagnostic quality. Compared with CT, the conebeam CT image noise was 37.3% higher (P < .001) and the SNR of the bone was 75% lower (P < .001). The effective dose of our conebeam CT protocol was 23 μSv. Compared with CT, the absorbed radiation dose to the lenses and parotid and thyroid glands with conebeam CT was 4%, 7.8%, and 7.3% of the dose delivered to the same organs by conventional CT (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Dental conebeam CT is a valid imaging procedure for the evaluation of patients with inflammatory sinonasal disorders.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CT is the imaging modality of choice to study the paranasal sinuses; unfortunately, it involves significant radiation dose. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic validity, image quality, and radiation-dose savings of dental conebeam CT in the evaluation of patients with suspected inflammatory disorders of the paranasal sinuses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively studied 40 patients with suspected inflammatory disorders of the sinuses with dental conebeam CT and standard CT. Two radiologists analyzed the images independently, blinded to clinical information. The image quality of both techniques and the diagnostic validity of dental conebeam CT compared with the reference standard CT were assessed by using 3 different scoring systems. Image noise, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio were calculated for both techniques. The absorbed radiation dose to the lenses and thyroid and parotid glands was measured by using a phantom and dosimeter chips. The effective radiation dose for CT was calculated. RESULTS: All dental conebeam CT scans were judged of diagnostic quality. Compared with CT, the conebeam CT image noise was 37.3% higher (P < .001) and the SNR of the bone was 75% lower (P < .001). The effective dose of our conebeam CT protocol was 23 μSv. Compared with CT, the absorbed radiation dose to the lenses and parotid and thyroid glands with conebeam CT was 4%, 7.8%, and 7.3% of the dose delivered to the same organs by conventional CT (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Dental conebeam CT is a valid imaging procedure for the evaluation of patients with inflammatory sinonasal disorders.
Authors: C Güldner; A Ningo; J Voigt; I Diogo; J Heinrichs; R Weber; T Wilhelm; M Fiebich Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-09-18 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Helena Christell; Stephen Birch; Keith Horner; Madeleine Rohlin; Christina Lindh Journal: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 3.383
Authors: Matthias H Brem; Amir A Zamani; Roberto Riva; Kelly H Zou; Zoran Rumboldt; Friedrich F Hennig; Ron Kikinis; Alexander M Norbash; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Florin Eggmann; Thomas Connert; Julia Bühler; Dorothea Dagassan-Berndt; Roland Weiger; Clemens Walter Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Christian Güldner; Isabell Diogo; Julia Leicht; Magis Mandapathil; Thomas Wilhelm; Afshin Teymoortash; Evelyn Jahns Journal: Int J Otolaryngol Date: 2017-01-31