References
- Gray CF. Practice-based cone-beam computed tomography: a review. Prim Dent Care 2010; 17: 161-7. https://doi.org/10.1308/135576110792936113
- Horner K, Jacobs R, Schulze R. Dental CBCT equipment and performance issues. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2013; 153: 212-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs289
- Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006; 72: 75-80.
- Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30: 1088-95. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1653
- Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 267-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.11.028
- Scarfe WC, Li Z, Aboelmaaty W, Scott SA, Farman AG. Maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography: essence, elements and steps to interpretation. Aust Dent J 2012; 57 Suppl 1: 46-60.
- Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 2: clinical applications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30: 1285-92. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1654
- Spin-Neto R, Wenzel A. Patient movement and motion artefacts in cone beam computed tomography of the dentomaxillofacial region: a systematic literature review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2016; 121: 425-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2015.11.019
- Santaella GM, Wenzel A, Haiter-Neto F, Rosalen PL, Spin-Neto R. Impact of movement and motion-artefact correction on image quality and interpretability in CBCT units with aligned and lateral-offset detectors. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2020; 49: 20190240. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20190240
- Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics 2004; 24: 1679-91. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.246045065
- 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
- Lee KM, Song JM, Cho JH, Hwang HS. Influence of head motion on the accuracy of 3D reconstruction with cone-beam CT: landmark identification errors in maxillofacial surface model. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0153210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153210
- Spin-Neto R, Costa C, Salgado DM, Zambrana NR, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Patient movement characteristics and the impact on CBCT image quality and interpretability. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20170216. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20170216
- Koong B. Cone beam imaging: is this the ultimate imaging modality? Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 1201-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01996.x
- Nervina JM. Cone beam computed tomography use in orthodontics. Aust Dent J 2012; 57 Suppl 1: 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01662.x
- Ahmad M, Jenny J, Downie M. Application of cone beam computed tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Aust Dent J 2012; 57 Suppl 1: 82-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01661.x
- Bontempi M, Bettuzzi M, Casali F, Pasini A, Rossi A, Ariu M. Relevance of head motion in dental cone-beam CT scanner images depending on patient positioning. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2008; 3: 249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-008-0157-1
- Spin-Neto R, Mudrak J, Matzen LH, Christensen J, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Cone beam CT image artefacts related to head motion simulated by a robot skull: visual characteristics and impact on image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 32310645. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/32310645
- Hanzelka T, Foltan R, Horka E, Sedy J. Reduction of the negative influence of patient motion on quality of CBCT scan. Med Hypotheses 2010; 75: 610-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2010.07.046
- Bhowmik UK, Adhami RR. A head motion measurement system suitable for 3D cone-beam tomography using markers. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2012; 2012: 5975-8.
- Hanzelka T, Dusek J, Ocasek F, Kucera J, Sedy J, Benes J, et al. Movement of the patient and the cone beam computed tomography scanner: objectives and possible solutions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013; 116: 769-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.08.010
- Donaldson K, O'Connor S, Heath N. Dental cone beam CT image quality possibly reduced by patient movement. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 91866873. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/91866873
- Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Factors affecting patient movement and re-exposure in cone beam computed tomography examination. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015; 119: 572-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2015.01.011
- Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Movement characteristics in young patients and the impact on CBCT image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150426. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150426
- Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Sorensen TS, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Accuracy of video observation and a three-dimensional head tracking system for detecting and quantifying robot-simulated head movements in cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017; 123: 721-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2017.02.010
- 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.
- Schulze RK, Michel M, Schwanecke U. Automated detection of patient movement during a CBCT scan based on the projection data. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015; 119: 468-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2014.12.008
- Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Liedke GS, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Radiographic observers' ability to recognize patient movement during cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20130449. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130449
- Nardi C, Taliani GG, Castellani A, De Falco L, Selvi V, Calistri L. Repetition of examination due to motion artifacts in horizontal cone beam CT: comparison among three different kinds of head support. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2017; 7: 208-13.
- Fassi A, Schaerer J, Riboldi M, Sarrut D, Baroni G. An image-based method to synchronize cone-beam CT and optical surface tracking. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2015; 16: 5152.
- Nardi C, Borri C, Regini F, Calistri L, Castellani A, Lorini C, et al. Metal and motion artifacts by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in dental and maxillofacial study. Radiol Med 2015; 120: 618-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-015-0496-2
- Gaeta-Araujo H, Nascimento EH, Fontenele RC, Mancini AX, Freitas DQ, Oliveira-Santos C. Magnitude of beam-hardening artifacts produced by gutta-percha and metal posts on conebeam computed tomography with varying tube current. Imaging Sci Dent 2020; 50: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.1
- 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
- Fontenele RC, Nascimento EHL, Santaella GM, Freitas DQ. Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images? Imaging Sci Dent 2020; 50: 23-30. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.23
Cited by
- Detection of mandibular canal in human dry mandibles with cone beam computed tomography using 270° and 360° protocols under continuous and pulse modes - A comparative study vol.33, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4103/jiaomr.jiaomr_217_21
- A novel three‐dimensional morphological analysis of idiopathic condylar resorption following stabilisation splint treatment vol.48, pp.5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13154