Imaging Science in Dentistry

  • 제53권4호
  • /
  • Pages.325-333
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2233-7822(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2233-7830(eISSN)
대한영상치의학회 (Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of the cone-beam computed tomography protocol on the accuracy and image quality of root surface area measurements: An in vitro study

  • 투고 : 2023.04.24
  • 심사 : 2023.08.03
  • 발행 : 2023.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy and image quality of root surface area (RSA) measurements obtained with various cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) protocols, relative to the gold standard of micro-computed tomography (CT), in an in vitro setting. Materials and Methods: Four dry human skulls were scanned using 8 different protocols, with voxel sizes of 0.15 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.4 mm. Three-dimensional models of the selected teeth were constructed using CBCT and microCT protocols, and the RSA was automatically measured by the image-processing software. The absolute difference in the percentage of the RSA(%ΔRSA) was calculated and compared across the 8 CBCT protocols using repeatedmeasures analysis of variance. Finally, image quality scores of the RSA measurements were computed and reported in terms of percent distribution. Results: No significant differences were observed in the %ΔRSA across the 8 protocols (P>0.05). The deviation in %ΔRSA ranged from 1.51% to 4.30%, with an increase corresponding to voxel size. As the voxel size increased, the image quality deteriorated. This decline in quality was particularly noticeable at the apical level of the root, where the distribution of poorer scores was most concentrated. Conclusion: Relative to CBCT protocols with voxel sizes of 0.15mm and 0.3mm, the protocols with a voxel size of 0.4 mm demonstrated inferior image quality at the apical levels. In spite of this, no significant discrepancies were observed in RSA measurements across the different CBCT protocols.

키워드

과제정보

The authors would like to thank the Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University for its support with the human dry skull samples; Ratikorn Kittada and the staff of the Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University for their helpfulness and advice regarding the CBCT acquisition technique; and the Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University for its support with the simulation software.

참고문헌

  1. Lakhani K, Vashishth V, Gugnani N. Root surface area measurement of permanent dentition in Indian population - CBCT analysis. Inform Med Unlocked 2017; 9: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imu.2017.05.003
  2. Park SB, An SY, Han WJ, Park JT. Three-dimensional measurement of periodontal surface area for quantifying inflammatory burden. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2017; 47: 154-64. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.3.154
  3. Tasanapanont J, Apisariyakul J, Wattanachai T, Sriwilas P, Midtbo M, Jotikasthira D. Comparison of 2 root surface area measurement methods: 3-dimensional laser scanning and cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2017; 47: 117-22. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2017.47.2.117
  4. American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc 2012; 143: 899-902. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0295
  5. Kharbanda OP, Wadhawan N, Balachandran R, Kandasamy D, Kapila SD. Functional and technical characteristics of different cone beam computed tomography units. In: Kapila SD. Cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics: indications, insights, and innovations. Ames: John Wiley & Sons; 2014. p. 43-66.
  6. Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent 2015; 45: 263-5. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2015.45.4.263
  7. Sherrard JF, Rossouw PE, Benson BW, Carrillo R, Buschang PH. Accuracy and reliability of tooth and root lengths measured on cone-beam computed tomographs. Am J Orthod Dento-facial Orthop 2010; 137(4 Suppl): S100-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.03.040
  8. Ye N, Jian F, Xue J, Wang S, Liao L, Huang W, et al. Accuracy of in-vitro tooth volumetric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 142: 879-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.05.020
  9. Maret D, Telmon N, Peters OA, Lepage B, Treil J, Inglese JM, et al. Effect of voxel size on the accuracy of 3D reconstructions with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 649-55. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/81804525
  10. Shaheen E, Khalil W, Ezeldeen M, Van de Casteele E, Sun Y, Politis C, et al. Accuracy of segmentation of tooth structures using 3 different CBCT machines. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017; 123: 123-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2016.09.005
  11. Suteerapongpun P, Sirabanchongkran S, Wattanachai T, Sriwilas P, Jotikasthira D. Root surface areas of maxillary permanent teeth in anterior normal overbite and anterior open bite assessed using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2017; 47: 241-6. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2017.47.4.241
  12. Dusseldorp JK, Stamatakis HC, Ren Y. Soft tissue coverage on the segmentation accuracy of the 3D surface-rendered model from cone-beam CT. Clin Oral Investig 2017; 21: 921-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1844-x
  13. Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Kolsuz E, Kurt H, Yuksel S, Paksoy C. Comparative assessment of subjective image quality of cross-sctional cone-beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Sci 2011; 53: 501-8. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.53.501
  14. Brezniak N, Wasserstein A. Root resorption after orthodontic treatment: Part 2. Literature review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 103: 138-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81763-9
  15. Gher ME, Vernino AR. Root morphology - clinical significance in pathogenesis and treatment of periodontal disease. J Am Dent Assoc 1980; 101: 627-33. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1980.0372
  16. Luthra SP, Narayan I, Subrahmanyam N. Root surface area measured by the benzene adsorption method. J Prosthet Dent 1974; 31: 185-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(74)90054-7
  17. Yamamoto T, Kinoshita Y, Tsuneishi M, Takizawa H, Umemura O, Watanabe T. Estimation of the remaining periodontal ligament from attachment-level measurements. J Clin Periodontol 2006; 33: 221-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2006.00888.x
  18. Kim I, Paik KS, Lee SP. Quantitative evaluation of the accuracy of micro-computed tomography in tooth measurement. Clin Anat 2007; 20: 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20265
  19. Gu Y, Tang Y, Zhu Q, Feng X. Measurement of root surface area of permanent teeth with root variations in a Chinese population - a micro-CT analysis. Arch Oral Biol 2016; 63: 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.12.001
  20. Maret D, Molinier F, Braga J, Peters OA, Telmon N, Treil J, et al. Accuracy of 3D reconstructions based on cone beam computed tomography. J Dent Res 2010; 89: 1465-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034510378011
  21. Wang T, Pei X, Luo F, Jia L, Qin H, Cheng X, et al. Evaluation of tooth root surface area using a three-dimensional scanning technique and cone beam computed tomographic reconstruction in vitro. Arch Oral Biol 2017; 84: 13-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2017.07.014
  22. Jia P, Yang G, Hu W, Chung KH, Zhao Y, Liu M, et al. Comparison of in situ cone beam computed tomography scan data with ex vivo optical scan data in the measurement of root surface area. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2019; 128: 552-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2019.05.004
  23. Wang Y, He S, Yu L, Li J, Chen S. Accuracy of volumetric measurement of teeth in vivo based on cone beam computer tomography. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011; 14: 206-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01525.x
  24. Spin-Neto R, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Impact of voxel size variation on CBCT-based diagnostic outcome in dentistry: a systematic review. J Digit Imaging 2013; 26: 813-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-012-9562-7
  25. Vizzotto MB, Silveira PF, Arus NA, Montagner F, Gomes BP, da Silveira HE. CBCT for the assessment of second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in maxillary molar teeth: effect of voxel size and presence of root filling. Int Endod J 2013; 46: 870-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12075
  26. Nanci A, Bosshardt DD. Structure of periodontal tissues in health and disease. Periodontol 2000 2006; 40: 11-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2005.00141.x
  27. Kiljunen T, Kaasalainen T, Suomalainen A, Kortesniemi M. Dental cone beam CT: a review. Phys Med 2015; 31: 844-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.09.004
  28. Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM. Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dento-facial Orthop 2011; 140: e25-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.012
  29. Dong T, Xia L, Cai C, Yuan L, Ye N, Fang B. Accuracy of in vitro mandibular volumetric measurements from CBCT of different voxel sizes with different segmentation threshold settings. BMC Oral Health 2019; 19: 206.
  30. Sang YH, Hu HC, Lu SH, Wu YW, Li WR, Tang ZH, et al. Accuracy assessment of three-dimensional surface reconstructions of in vivo teeth from cone-beam computed tomography. Chin Med J(Engl) 2016; 129: 1464-70.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.183430