George K Koch1,2, Adam Hamilton3, Kelly Wang4, Laura Herschdorfer4, Kyu Ha Lee5, German O Gallucci1, Bernard Friedland6. 1. 1 Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine , Boston, MA , USA. 2. 2 Boston Veteran Affairs Healthcare System , Boston, MA , USA. 3. 3 Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Division of Regenerative and Implant Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine , Boston, MA , USA. 4. 4 Harvard School of Dental Medicine , Boston, MA , USA. 5. 5 Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Dental Medicine , Boston, MA , USA. 6. 6 Department of Oral Medicine, Infection, and Immunity, Harvard Schoolof Dental Medicine , Boston, MA , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cone beam CT (CBCT) machines do not always allow for patients to be scanned in the ideal position for image acquisition. This study aimed to investigate the influence of the position/angulation of the mandible relative to the X-ray beam of a CBCT machine. METHODS: Five sequential CBCT scans were captured of a human mandible at each angulation of 10°, 20°, 30°, and 40° using a coronal and sagittal positioning. Inspection software utilized a best-fit alignment to automatically calculate the three-dimensional variation at 15 standardized points of interest. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found between the dimensional accuracy of CBCT scans taken at 10° (26.3 µm) of coronal angulation, as well as those taken at 20° (-17.3 mm) and 30° (35.2 mm) of sagittal angulations (p < 0.001, 0.016, and <0.001, respectively). The largest deviations in accuracy included an overall maximum deviation of 490 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The position of the mandible with respect to the X-ray beam has a clinically insignificant effect on dimensional accuracy, up to the maximum angle of 40° assessed.
OBJECTIVES: Cone beam CT (CBCT) machines do not always allow for patients to be scanned in the ideal position for image acquisition. This study aimed to investigate the influence of the position/angulation of the mandible relative to the X-ray beam of a CBCT machine. METHODS: Five sequential CBCT scans were captured of a human mandible at each angulation of 10°, 20°, 30°, and 40° using a coronal and sagittal positioning. Inspection software utilized a best-fit alignment to automatically calculate the three-dimensional variation at 15 standardized points of interest. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found between the dimensional accuracy of CBCT scans taken at 10° (26.3 µm) of coronal angulation, as well as those taken at 20° (-17.3 mm) and 30° (35.2 mm) of sagittal angulations (p < 0.001, 0.016, and <0.001, respectively). The largest deviations in accuracy included an overall maximum deviation of 490 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The position of the mandible with respect to the X-ray beam has a clinically insignificant effect on dimensional accuracy, up to the maximum angle of 40° assessed.
Authors: Maria Eugenia Guerrero; Reinhilde Jacobs; Miet Loubele; Filip Schutyser; Paul Suetens; Daniel van Steenberghe Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2006-02-16 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Mauricio Berco; Paul H Rigali; R Matthew Miner; Stephelynn DeLuca; Nina K Anderson; Leslie A Will Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 2.650