Influence of windowing and metal artefact reduction algorithms on the volumetric dimensions of five different high-density materials: a cone-beam CT study.

Szczegóły
Abstrakt

Tytuł:: Influence of windowing and metal artefact reduction algorithms on the volumetric dimensions of five different high-density materials: a cone-beam CT study.
Autorzy:: Coelho-Silva F; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
Martins LAC; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
Braga DA; Bachelor of Statistics in progress, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Zandonade E; Department of Statistics, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Haiter-Neto F; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
de-Azevedo-Vaz SL; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.; Department of Clinical Dentistry, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Źródło:: Dento maxillo facial radiology [Dentomaxillofac Radiol] 2020 Dec 01; Vol. 49 (8), pp. 20200039. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Jun 25.
Typ publikacji:: Journal Article
Język:: English
Imprint Name(s):: Publication: 2003- : London : British Institute of Radiology
Original Publication: Erlangen, Germany : University Press Erlangen
MeSH Terms:: Artifacts*
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography*
Algorithms ; Metals ; Reproducibility of Results
References:: Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Oct;26(10):1222-8. (PMID: 25040484)
Int Endod J. 2015 Oct;48(10):994-1000. (PMID: 25307251)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012 Mar;41(3):248-53. (PMID: 22241878)
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Aug;23(8):3267-3273. (PMID: 30488119)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Sep/Oct;34(5):1114-1120. (PMID: 31528863)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140204. (PMID: 25168812)
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:3848207. (PMID: 28798929)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Aug;40(8):845-50. (PMID: 21621979)
Implant Dent. 2018 Feb;27(1):10-14. (PMID: 29095787)
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017 Feb;123(2):265-272. (PMID: 28086998)
Int Endod J. 2019 Jun;52(6):866-873. (PMID: 30585641)
Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Jan;22(1):419-423. (PMID: 28536782)
Int Endod J. 2020 Apr;53(4):506-512. (PMID: 31655019)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2019 Mar;48(3):20180290. (PMID: 30540919)
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Mar;23(3):1263-1270. (PMID: 29984377)
Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2018 Sep 20;10:195-202. (PMID: 30288125)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(5):20120245. (PMID: 23520395)
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Dec;28(12):1509-1514. (PMID: 28432698)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(8):20130176. (PMID: 23956236)
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2018 Jul;27(7):1001-1008. (PMID: 29999253)
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017 Jun;123(6):729-734. (PMID: 28412235)
Int J Prosthodont. 2019 Mar/Apr;32(2):198-200. (PMID: 30856646)
J Digit Imaging. 2011 Dec;24(6):959-66. (PMID: 21448762)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140224. (PMID: 25263643)
J Dent Sci. 2019 Jun;14(2):119-125. (PMID: 31210886)
J Dent (Tehran). 2017 Nov;14(6):329-336. (PMID: 29942327)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Jul;40(5):265-73. (PMID: 21697151)
Radiographics. 2004 Nov-Dec;24(6):1679-91. (PMID: 15537976)
Dent Clin North Am. 2008 Oct;52(4):707-30, v. (PMID: 18805225)
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Nov;46(11):1134-1143. (PMID: 31446644)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(6):20140428. (PMID: 25764360)
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2019 Jan;127(1):71-76. (PMID: 30528550)
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2020 Jul;49(5):20190385. (PMID: 32155087)
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016 May;121(5):550-6. (PMID: 27068312)
Neuroimage. 2006 Jul 1;31(3):1116-28. (PMID: 16545965)
Contributed Indexing:: Keywords: artifacts; cone-beam computed tomography; dental materials
Substance Nomenclature:: 0 (Metals)
Entry Date(s):: Date Created: 20200617 Date Completed: 20201125 Latest Revision: 20220418
Update Code:: 20240105
PubMed Central ID:: PMC7719861
DOI:: 10.1259/dmfr.20200039
PMID:: 32543940
: Czasopismo naukowe

Full Text Finder

Objective: To assess the influence of windowing and metal artefact reduction (MAR) algorithms on the volumetric dimensions of high-density materials using two CBCT systems.
Methods: Four cylinders of amalgam, cobalt-chromium, gutta-percha, titanium and zirconium, were manufactured and their physical volumes (PV) were measured. A polymethyl methacrylate phantom containing the cylinders was submitted to CBCT acquisitions with Picasso Trio and OP300 units with their MAR enabled and disabled. The tomographic volume (TV) of all the cylinders was obtained by semi-automatic segmentation using two windowing adjustments: W1-large window width and upper window level; W2-narrow window width and low window level. Volumetric distortion was expressed as the difference between TV and PV. Statistics comprised intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures with Tukey post hoc test (α = 5%).
Results: The ICC values indicated excellent reproducibility of TV. Gutta-percha and titanium resulted in the smallest volumetric distortion. Using W1 provided less volumetric distortion for almost all experimental conditions ( p < 0.05). Activating MAR algorithm of Picasso Trio underestimated gutta-percha and titanium TV ( p < 0.05) and was inefficient in significantly reducing the volumetric distortion of the other materials ( p > 0.05). Disabling MAR algorithm of OP300 resulted in smaller volumetric distortion for almost all experimental conditions ( p < 0.05).
Conclusions: The TV of gutta-percha and titanium were closer to the PV. In general, the MAR algorithms of both systems were inefficient in significantly reducing the volumetric distortion of high-density materials. We encourage the use of large window width and upper window level to evaluate high-density materials.

Informacja