Margarete B McGuigan1, Christie Theodorakou2, Henry F Duncan1, Jonathan Davies3, Anita Sengupta4, Keith Horner1,4. 1. Dublin Dental University Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 2. Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 3. Guy's Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 4. Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify a dose as low as diagnostically acceptable and a threshold level of image quality for cone beam CT (CBCT) imaging root canals, using maxillary first molar (M1M) second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals of varying complexity for two CBCT scanners. METHODS: Dose-area product (DAP) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured for two scanners at a range of exposure parameters. Subjective-image-quality assessment at the same exposures was performed for three M1Ms of varying MB2 complexity, positioned in an anthropomorphic phantom. Nine raters (three endodontists, three dental radiologists and three junior staff) assessed canal visibility, using a 5-point confidence scale rating. RESULTS: Identification of simple-moderate MB2 canal complexity was achieved at a range of protocols, with DAP values of ≥209.3 and ≥203.2 mGy cm² and CNRs of 3 and 7.6 for Promax®3D and Accuitomo-F170® respectively. For complex canal anatomy, target subjective image quality was not achieved, even at the highest DAP values for both scanners. Junior staff classified significantly more images as undiagnostic compared with senior staff (p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: In this first study to address optimisation of CBCT imaging of root canal anatomy, a similar threshold dose for both scanners was identified for M1Ms with simple-moderate MB2 canal complexity. Increasing dose to enhance visualisation of more complex canal anatomy was ineffective. Selection of standard protocols (while avoiding lower kV/mA protocols) instead of high-resolution scans was a practical means of reducing patient dose. CNR is not a transferable measure of image quality.
OBJECTIVES: To identify a dose as low as diagnostically acceptable and a threshold level of image quality for cone beam CT (CBCT) imaging root canals, using maxillary first molar (M1M) second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals of varying complexity for two CBCT scanners. METHODS: Dose-area product (DAP) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured for two scanners at a range of exposure parameters. Subjective-image-quality assessment at the same exposures was performed for three M1Ms of varying MB2 complexity, positioned in an anthropomorphic phantom. Nine raters (three endodontists, three dental radiologists and three junior staff) assessed canal visibility, using a 5-point confidence scale rating. RESULTS: Identification of simple-moderate MB2 canal complexity was achieved at a range of protocols, with DAP values of ≥209.3 and ≥203.2 mGy cm² and CNRs of 3 and 7.6 for Promax®3D and Accuitomo-F170® respectively. For complex canal anatomy, target subjective image quality was not achieved, even at the highest DAP values for both scanners. Junior staff classified significantly more images as undiagnostic compared with senior staff (p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: In this first study to address optimisation of CBCT imaging of root canal anatomy, a similar threshold dose for both scanners was identified for M1Ms with simple-moderate MB2 canal complexity. Increasing dose to enhance visualisation of more complex canal anatomy was ineffective. Selection of standard protocols (while avoiding lower kV/mA protocols) instead of high-resolution scans was a practical means of reducing patient dose. CNR is not a transferable measure of image quality.
Authors: Jorge N R Martins; Duarte Marques; Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal Silva; João Caramês; Marco A Versiani Journal: J Endod Date: 2019-03-02 Impact factor: 4.171