Literature DB >> 30484205

Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis.

Warangkana Weerawanich1,2, Mayumi Shimizu3, Yohei Takeshita4, Kazutoshi Okamura5, Shoko Yoshida6, Gainer R Jasa7, Kazunori Yoshiura5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters for specific diagnostic tasks.
METHODS: A Teflon phantom attached to a half-mandible in a large container was scanned in dental (D), implant (I), and panoramic (P) modes. An identical phantom in a small container was scanned in D mode. Both were scanned at 60, 80, 100, and 120 kV. We evaluated the image quality of five anatomical structures [dentinoenamel junction (1), lamina dura and periodontal ligament space (2), trabecular pattern (3), cortex-spongy bone junction (4), and pulp chamber and root canal (5)] and analyzed the diagnostic image quality with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. We then evaluated correlations between the two image qualities and calculated the threshold of acceptable diagnostic image quality. Optimum exposure parameters were determined from images with acceptable diagnostic image quality.
RESULTS: For the small container, the optimum exposure parameters were D mode, 80 kV for (1), (3), and (4) and D mode, 100 kV for (5). For the large container, they were D mode, 120 kV for (1), (3), and (5) and D mode, 100 kV for (4). I mode, 120 kV reached the acceptable level for (4). No images reached the acceptable level for (2).
CONCLUSIONS: No optimum exposure parameters were identified for the evaluation of the lamina dura and periodontal ligament space. D mode was sufficient for the other structures; however, the tube voltage required for each structure differed. Smaller patients required lower tube voltage. I mode, 120 kV may be used for larger lesions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anatomic landmarks; Computer-assisted radiographic image interpretation; Cone-beam computed tomography; Imaging phantoms; Visual perception

Year:  2018        PMID: 30484205     DOI: 10.1007/s11282-018-0348-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Radiol        ISSN: 0911-6028            Impact factor:   1.852


  23 in total

1.  The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure?

Authors:  W E R Berkhout; D A Beuger; G C H Sanderink; P F van der Stelt
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Development of a low-dose protocol for cone beam CT examinations of the anterior maxilla in children.

Authors:  Jose A Hidalgo Rivas; Keith Horner; Badri Thiruvenkatachari; Jonathan Davies; Chrysoula Theodorakou
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  The effect of dose reduction on the detection of anatomical structures on panoramic radiographs.

Authors:  G Kaeppler; K Dietz; S Reinert
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to evaluate simulated external root resorption.

Authors:  Gabriela Salatino Liedke; Heloísa Emília Dias da Silveira; Heraldo Luis Dias da Silveira; Vinícius Dutra; José Antônio Poli de Figueiredo
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.171

5.  Image noise and liver lesion detection with MDCT: a phantom study.

Authors:  Kalpana M Kanal; Jonathan H Chung; Jin Wang; Puneet Bhargava; Jennifer R Kohr; William P Shuman; Brent K Stewart
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: Effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose.

Authors:  Zachary T Librizzi; Aditya S Tadinada; Jayasanker V Valiyaparambil; Alan G Lurie; Sanjay M Mallya
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography diagnostic image quality using cluster signal-to-noise analysis.

Authors:  Warangkana Weerawanich; Mayumi Shimizu; Yohei Takeshita; Kazutoshi Okamura; Shoko Yoshida; Gainer R Jasa; Kazunori Yoshiura
Journal:  Oral Radiol       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 1.852

8.  Influence of exposure factors on the variability of CBCT voxel values: a phantom study.

Authors:  M L Oliveira; D Q Freitas; G M B Ambrosano; F Haiter-Neto
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 2.419

9.  Exposure parameters and their effects on diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  B Svenson; U Welander; G Anneroth; B Söderfeldt
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1994-10

10.  Optimization of dental CBCT exposures through mAs reduction.

Authors:  R Pauwels; L Seynaeve; J C G Henriques; C de Oliveira-Santos; P C Souza; F H Westphalen; I R F Rubira-Bullen; R F Ribeiro-Rotta; M I B Rockenbach; F Haiter-Neto; P Pittayapat; H Bosmans; R Bogaerts; R Jacobs
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 2.419

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.