Exploring CT pixel and voxel size effect on anatomic modeling in mandibular reconstruction.

IF 3.2 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Maariyah Ahmed, Myra Garzanich, Luigi E Melaragno, Sarah Nyirjesy, Natalia Von Windheim, Matthew Marquardt, Michael Luttrull, Nathan Quails, Kyle K VanKoevering
{"title":"Exploring CT pixel and voxel size effect on anatomic modeling in mandibular reconstruction.","authors":"Maariyah Ahmed, Myra Garzanich, Luigi E Melaragno, Sarah Nyirjesy, Natalia Von Windheim, Matthew Marquardt, Michael Luttrull, Nathan Quails, Kyle K VanKoevering","doi":"10.1186/s41205-024-00223-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computer-aided modeling and design (CAM/CAD) of patient anatomy from computed tomography (CT) imaging and 3D printing technology enable the creation of tangible, patient-specific anatomic models that can be used for surgical guidance. These models have been associated with better patient outcomes; however, a lack of CT imaging guidelines risks the capture of unsuitable imaging for patient-specific modeling. This study aims to investigate how CT image pixel size (X-Y) and slice thickness (Z) impact the accuracy of mandibular models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six cadaver heads were CT scanned at varying slice thicknesses and pixel sizes and turned into CAD models of the mandible for each scan. The cadaveric mandibles were then dissected and surface scanned, producing a CAD model of the true anatomy to be used as the gold standard for digital comparison. The root mean square (RMS) value of these comparisons, and the percentage of points that deviated from the true cadaveric anatomy by over 2.00 mm were used to evaluate accuracy. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests were used to determine significant differences in accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two-way ANOVA demonstrated significant difference in RMS for slice thickness but not pixel size while post-hoc testing showed a significant difference in pixel size only between pixels of 0.32 mm and 1.32 mm. For slice thickness, post-hoc testing revealed significantly smaller RMS values for scans with slice thicknesses of 0.67 mm, 1.25 mm, and 3.00 mm compared to those with a slice thickness of 5.00 mm. No significant differences were found between 0.67 mm, 1.25 mm, and 3.00 mm slice thicknesses. Results for the percentage of points deviating from cadaveric anatomy greater than 2.00 mm agreed with those for RMS except when comparing pixel sizes of 0.75 mm and 0.818 mm against 1.32 mm in post-hoc testing, which showed a significant difference as well.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study suggests that slice thickness has a more significant impact on 3D model accuracy than pixel size, providing objective validation for guidelines favoring rigorous standards for slice thickness while recommending isotropic voxels. Additionally, our results indicate that CT scans up to 3.00 mm in slice thickness may provide an adequate 3D model for facial bony anatomy, such as the mandible, depending on the clinical indication.</p>","PeriodicalId":72036,"journal":{"name":"3D printing in medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11202317/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"3D printing in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-024-00223-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Computer-aided modeling and design (CAM/CAD) of patient anatomy from computed tomography (CT) imaging and 3D printing technology enable the creation of tangible, patient-specific anatomic models that can be used for surgical guidance. These models have been associated with better patient outcomes; however, a lack of CT imaging guidelines risks the capture of unsuitable imaging for patient-specific modeling. This study aims to investigate how CT image pixel size (X-Y) and slice thickness (Z) impact the accuracy of mandibular models.

Methods: Six cadaver heads were CT scanned at varying slice thicknesses and pixel sizes and turned into CAD models of the mandible for each scan. The cadaveric mandibles were then dissected and surface scanned, producing a CAD model of the true anatomy to be used as the gold standard for digital comparison. The root mean square (RMS) value of these comparisons, and the percentage of points that deviated from the true cadaveric anatomy by over 2.00 mm were used to evaluate accuracy. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests were used to determine significant differences in accuracy.

Results: Two-way ANOVA demonstrated significant difference in RMS for slice thickness but not pixel size while post-hoc testing showed a significant difference in pixel size only between pixels of 0.32 mm and 1.32 mm. For slice thickness, post-hoc testing revealed significantly smaller RMS values for scans with slice thicknesses of 0.67 mm, 1.25 mm, and 3.00 mm compared to those with a slice thickness of 5.00 mm. No significant differences were found between 0.67 mm, 1.25 mm, and 3.00 mm slice thicknesses. Results for the percentage of points deviating from cadaveric anatomy greater than 2.00 mm agreed with those for RMS except when comparing pixel sizes of 0.75 mm and 0.818 mm against 1.32 mm in post-hoc testing, which showed a significant difference as well.

Conclusion: This study suggests that slice thickness has a more significant impact on 3D model accuracy than pixel size, providing objective validation for guidelines favoring rigorous standards for slice thickness while recommending isotropic voxels. Additionally, our results indicate that CT scans up to 3.00 mm in slice thickness may provide an adequate 3D model for facial bony anatomy, such as the mandible, depending on the clinical indication.

探索 CT 像素和体素大小对下颌骨重建中解剖建模的影响。
背景:通过计算机断层扫描(CT)成像和三维打印技术对患者解剖结构进行计算机辅助建模和设计(CAM/CAD),可创建有形的患者特异性解剖模型,用于手术指导。这些模型与更好的患者预后有关;然而,由于缺乏 CT 成像指南,可能会捕捉到不适合患者特异性建模的图像。本研究旨在探讨 CT 图像像素大小(X-Y)和切片厚度(Z)如何影响下颌骨模型的准确性:方法:以不同的切片厚度和像素大小对六个尸体头部进行 CT 扫描,并将每次扫描结果转化为下颌骨的 CAD 模型。然后对尸体下颌骨进行解剖和表面扫描,生成真实解剖结构的 CAD 模型,作为数字比较的金标准。这些比较的均方根(RMS)值以及与真实尸体解剖结构偏差超过 2.00 毫米的点的百分比用于评估准确性。采用双向方差分析和 Tukey-Kramer 事后检验来确定准确性的显著差异:结果:双向方差分析显示,切片厚度的有效值有显著差异,但像素大小无显著差异;事后检验显示,像素大小仅在 0.32 毫米和 1.32 毫米之间有显著差异。在切片厚度方面,事后检验显示,切片厚度为 0.67 毫米、1.25 毫米和 3.00 毫米的扫描 RMS 值明显小于切片厚度为 5.00 毫米的扫描 RMS 值。在 0.67 毫米、1.25 毫米和 3.00 毫米切片厚度之间没有发现明显差异。偏离尸体解剖结构大于 2.00 毫米的点的百分比结果与 RMS 的结果一致,但在事后测试中将 0.75 毫米和 0.818 毫米的像素尺寸与 1.32 毫米的像素尺寸进行比较时,结果显示两者之间也存在显著差异:这项研究表明,切片厚度比像素大小对三维模型准确性的影响更大,这为指南提供了客观的验证,使其在推荐各向同性体素的同时,倾向于采用严格的切片厚度标准。此外,我们的研究结果表明,根据临床适应症,切片厚度不超过 3.00 毫米的 CT 扫描可为下颌骨等面部骨骼解剖提供足够的三维模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信