Literature DB >> 33378479

Can modifying shielding, field of view, and exposure settings make the effective dose of a cone-beam computed tomography comparable to traditional radiographs used for orthodontic diagnosis?

Stephanie Ting, Diana Attaia, K Brandon Johnson, Samer Shoukry Kossa, Bernard Friedland, Veerasathpurush Allareddy, Mohamed I Masoud.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effect of changes in exposure settings, field of view (FOV), and shielding on radiation to an adult and child phantom from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging compared to panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effective dose to an adult and child anthropomorphic phantom by the CS 9300 using various scan protocols was recorded. Absorbed radiation was measured with optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters and effective dose calculated using 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection tissue weighting factors. Scan protocols included different FOVs, voxel sizes, and standard versus low-dose protocols. Radiation shielding was used when it did not interfere with FOV. Panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken with the Orthophos SL.
RESULTS: Even with shielding, smaller FOVs, and increased voxel sizes, the effective dose of standard CBCT scans was higher than panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs. A shielded limited FOV standard scan combined with a lateral cephalometric radiograph resulted in a lower dose (P < .001) than a full FOV standard scan. Low-dose shielded scans resulted in significant dose reductions to the adult (P < .05) and child (P < .001) phantoms compared to the respective panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs combined. Image quality analysis was not possible with radiation equivalent phantoms.
CONCLUSIONS: Unlike standard CBCTs, shielded low-dose CBCT protocols in the CS 9300 have lower effective doses than conventional radiographs for adult and child phantoms. If high resolution and cranial base visualization are necessary, combining a shielded LFOV standard exposure with a cephalometric radiograph is recommended.
© 2020 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cone beam computed tomography; Diagnostic imaging; Dosimetry

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33378479      PMCID: PMC8032258          DOI: 10.2319/072819-496.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  21 in total

Review 1.  The current status of cone beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics.

Authors:  S Kapila; R S Conley; W E Harrell
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

3.  Effect of leaded glasses and thyroid shielding on cone beam CT radiation dose in an adult female phantom.

Authors:  A D Goren; R D Prins; L T Dauer; B Quinn; A Al-Najjar; R D Faber; G Patchell; I Branets; D C Colosi
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  3D dentofacial photogrammetry reference values: a novel approach to orthodontic diagnosis.

Authors:  Mohamed I Masoud; Neetu Bansal; Jose C Castillo; Amornrut Manosudprasit; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; Arshan Haghi; Hannah C Hawkins; Erik Otárola-Castillo
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Effectiveness of thyroid gland shielding in dental CBCT using a paediatric anthropomorphic phantom.

Authors:  A Hidalgo; J Davies; K Horner; C Theodorakou
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Effect of bone thickness on alveolar bone-height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images.

Authors:  Zongyang Sun; Tharon Smith; Sahira Kortam; Do-Gyoon Kim; Boon Ching Tee; Henry Fields
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  Assessment of phantom dosimetry and image quality of i-CAT FLX cone-beam computed tomography.

Authors:  John B Ludlow; Cameron Walker
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.650

8.  Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation.

Authors:  John B Ludlow; Laura E Davies-Ludlow; Stuart C White
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.634

9.  Impact of cone-beam computed tomography on orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.

Authors:  Ryan J Hodges; Kathryn A Atchison; Stuart C White
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.650

10.  Thyroid shields and neck exposures in cephalometric radiography.

Authors:  Philippe Hujoel; Lars Hollender; Anne-Marie Bollen; John D Young; Joana Cunha-Cruz; Molly McGee; Alex Grosso
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2006-06-13       Impact factor: 1.930

View more
  1 in total

1.  How well do integrated 3D models predict alveolar defects after treatment with clear aligners?

Authors:  Ting Jiang; Jian Kai Wang; Yang Yang Jiang; Zheng Hu; Guo Hua Tang
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 2.079

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.