Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?

  • Fontenele, Rocharles C. (Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas(UNICAMP)) ;
  • Nascimento, Eduarda H.L. (Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas(UNICAMP)) ;
  • Santaella, Gustavo M. (Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas(UNICAMP)) ;
  • Freitas, Deborah Queiroz (Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas(UNICAMP))
  • Received : 2019.10.18
  • Accepted : 2020.01.08
  • Published : 2020.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm activated at different times during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition on the magnitude of artifacts generated by a zirconium implant. Materials and Methods: Volumes were obtained with and without a zirconium implant in a human mandible, using the OP300 Maxio unit. Three modes were tested: without MAR, with MAR activated after acquisition, and with MAR activated before acquisition. Artifacts were assessed in terms of the standard deviation (SD) of gray values and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 6 regions of interest with different distances (10 to 35 mm, from the nearest to the farthest) and angulations(70° to 135°) from the implant region. Results: In the acquisitions without MAR, the regions closer to the implant(10 and 15mm) had a higher SD and lower CNR than the farther regions. When MAR was activated (before or after), SD values did not differ among the regions (P>0.05). The region closest to the implant presented a significantly lower CNR in the acquisitions without MAR than when MAR was activated after the acquisition; however, activating MAR before the acquisition did not yield significant differences from either of the other conditions. Conclusion: Both modes of MAR activation were effective in decreasing the magnitude of CBCT artifacts, especially when the effects of the artifacts were more noticeable.

Keywords

References

  1. Molteni R. Prospects and challenges of rendering tissue density in Hounsfield units for cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013; 116: 105-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.04.013
  2. Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D, Bruellmann DD, Dranischnikow E, Schwanecke U, et al. Artefacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40: 265-73. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/30642039
  3. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52: 707-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.05.005
  4. Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp LW, Sorensen TS, Wenzel A. An ex vivo study of automated motion artefact correction and the impact on cone beam CT image quality and interpretability. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20180013.
  5. Bezerra IS, Neves FS, Vasconcelos TV, Ambrosano GM, Freitas DQ. Influence of the artefact reduction algorithm of Picasso Trio CBCT system on the diagnosis of vertical root fractures in teeth with metal posts. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20140428. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140428
  6. Steiger-Ronay V, Krcmaric Z, Schmidlin PR, Sahrmann P, Wiedemeier DB, Benic GI. Assessment of peri-implant defects at titanium and zirconium dioxide implants by means of periapical radiographs and cone beam computed tomography: an in-vitro examination. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29: 1195-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13383
  7. Queiroz PM, Groppo FC, Oliveira ML, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas DQ. Evaluation of the efficacy of a metal artifact reduction algorithm in different cone beam computed tomography scanning parameters. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017; 123: 729-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2017.02.015
  8. Vasconcelos KF, Codari M, Queiroz PM, Nicolielo LF, Freitas DQ, Sforza C, et al. The performance of metal artifact reduction algorithms in cone beam computed tomography images considering the effects of materials, metal positions, and fields of view. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2019; 127: 71-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2018.09.004
  9. Freitas DQ, Fontenele RC, Nascimento EH, Vasconcelos TV, Noujeim M. Influence of acquisition parameters on the magnitude of cone beam computed tomography artifacts. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20180151. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20180151
  10. Queiroz PM, Oliveira ML, Groppo FC, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas DQ. Evaluation of metal artefact reduction in cone-beam computed tomography images of different dental materials. Clin Oral Investig 2018; 22: 419-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2128-9
  11. Vasconcelos TV, Bechara BB, McMahan CA, Freitas DQ, Noujeim M. Evaluation of artifacts generated by zirconium implants in cone-beam computed tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017; 123: 265-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2016.10.021
  12. Queiroz PM, Santaella GM, da Paz TD, Freitas DQ. Evaluation of a metal artefact reduction tool on different positions of a metal object in the FOV. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160366. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160366
  13. Nascimento EH, Fontenele RC, Santaella GM, Freitas DQ. Difference in the artefacts production and the performance of the metal artefact reduction (MAR) tool between the buccal and lingual cortical plates adjacent to zirconium dental implant. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2019; 48: 20190058. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20190058
  14. Fontenele RC, Nascimento EH, Vasconcelos TV, Noujeim M, Freitas DQ. Magnitude of cone beam CT image artifacts related to zirconium and titanium implants: impact on image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20180021. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20180021
  15. Bechara B, Mcmahan CA, Moore WS, Noujeim M, Geha H. Contrast-to-noise ratio with different large volumes in a conebeam computerized tomography machine: an in vitro study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 114: 658-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2012.08.436
  16. Demirturk Kocasarac H, Ustaoglu G, Bayrak S, Katkar R, Geha H, Deahl ST 2nd, et al. Evaluation of artifacts generated by titanium, zirconium, and titanium-zirconium alloy dental implants on MRI, CT, and CBCT images: a phantom study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2019; 127: 535-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2019.01.074
  17. Machado AH, Fardim KA, de Souza CF, Sotto-Maior BS, Assis NM, Devito KL. Effect of anatomical region on the formation of metal artefacts produced by dental implants in cone beam computed tomographic images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20170281.
  18. Sancho-Puchades M, Hammerle CH, Benic GI. In vitro assessment of artifacts induced by titanium, titanium-zirconium and zirconium dioxide implants in cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 26: 1222-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12438
  19. Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, Hunter R, Benavides E, Samuelson DB, et al. Effective dose of dental CBCT - a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20140197. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140197
  20. Freitas DQ, Vasconcelos TV, Noujeim M. Diagnosis of vertical root fracture in teeth close and distant to implant: an in vitro study to assess the influence of artifacts produced in cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 2019; 23: 1263-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2558-z
  21. Freitas DQ, Nascimento EH, Vasconcelos TV, Noujeim M. Diagnosis of external root resorption in teeth close and distant to zirconium implants: influence of acquisition parameters and artefacts produced during cone beam computed tomography. Int Endod J 2019; 52: 866-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13065
  22. Spin-Neto R, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Variation in voxel value distribution and effect of time between exposures in six CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20130376. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130376

Cited by

  1. Influence of CBCT metal artifact reduction on vertical radicular fracture detection vol.51, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20200191
  2. Accuracy of digital model generated from CT data with metal artifact reduction algorithm vol.11, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89298-x