Niina Kuusisto1,2,3, Sisko Huumonen1,3,4,5,6, Antti Kotiaho7,8,9, Marianne Haapea7,8,9, Jami Rekola10, Pekka Vallittu2. 1. 1 Department of Oral Pathology and Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, University of Turku , Turku , Finland. 2. 2 Department of Biomaterials Science and Turku Clinical Biomaterials Centre - TCBC, Institute of Dentistry and BioCity, University of Turku and City of Turku, Welfare Division , Turku , Finland. 3. 3 Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Turku University Hospital , Turku , Finland. 4. 4 Department of Oral Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, University of Eastern Finland , Kuopio , Finland. 5. 5 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kuopio University Hospital, Unit of Oral HealthSciences , Kuopio , Finland. 6. 6 Department of Oral Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, University of Oulu , Oulu , Finland. 7. 7 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital , Oulu , Finland. 8. 8 Department of Physics and Technology, Research Unit of Medical Imaging, Physics and Technology, University of Oulu , Oulu , Finland. 9. 9 Medical Research Center, Organisation of Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu , Oulu , Finland. 10. 10 Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Turku University Hospital , Turku , Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: : The aim was to compare titanium and glass fibre-reinforced composite (FRC) orbital floor implants using cone beam CT (CBCT). FRC implants are nonmetallic and these implants have not been analysed in CBCT images before. The purpose of this study is to compare the artefact formation of the titanium and the FRC orbital floor implants in CBCT images. METHODS: : One commercially pure titanium and one S-glass FRC with bioactive glass particles implant were imaged with CBCT using the same imaging values (80 kV, 1 mA, FOV 60 × 60 mm). CBCT images were analysed in axial slices from three areas to determine the magnitude of the artefacts in the vicinity of the implants. Quantified results based on the gray values of images were analysed using analysis-of-variance. RESULTS: : Compared to the reference the gray values of the titanium implant are more negative in every region of interest in all slices (p < 0.05) whereas the gray values of the FRC implant differ statistically significantly in less than half of the examined areas. CONCLUSIONS: : The titanium implant caused artefacts in all of the analysed CBCT slices. Compared to the reference the gray values of the FRC implant changed only slightly and this feature enables to use wider imaging options postoperatively.
OBJECTIVES: : The aim was to compare titanium and glass fibre-reinforced composite (FRC) orbital floor implants using cone beam CT (CBCT). FRC implants are nonmetallic and these implants have not been analysed in CBCT images before. The purpose of this study is to compare the artefact formation of the titanium and the FRC orbital floor implants in CBCT images. METHODS: : One commercially pure titanium and one S-glass FRC with bioactive glass particles implant were imaged with CBCT using the same imaging values (80 kV, 1 mA, FOV 60 × 60 mm). CBCT images were analysed in axial slices from three areas to determine the magnitude of the artefacts in the vicinity of the implants. Quantified results based on the gray values of images were analysed using analysis-of-variance. RESULTS: : Compared to the reference the gray values of the titanium implant are more negative in every region of interest in all slices (p < 0.05) whereas the gray values of the FRC implant differ statistically significantly in less than half of the examined areas. CONCLUSIONS: : The titanium implant caused artefacts in all of the analysed CBCT slices. Compared to the reference the gray values of the FRC implant changed only slightly and this feature enables to use wider imaging options postoperatively.
Authors: Andrea Scribante; Pekka K Vallittu; Mutlu Özcan; Lippo V J Lassila; Paola Gandini; Maria Francesca Sfondrini Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Joonas Toivonen; Mikko Björkqvist; Heikki Minn; Pekka K Vallittu; Jami Rekola Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 2.102