Repeatability of gray value-based bone density measurements in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images under different acquisition protocols.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Luciano Augusto Cano Martins, Leszek Szalewski, Krzysztof Pałka, Paweł Kalinowski, Marcelo Gusmão Paraiso Cavalcanti, Ingrid Różyło-Kalinowska
{"title":"Repeatability of gray value-based bone density measurements in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images under different acquisition protocols.","authors":"Luciano Augusto Cano Martins, Leszek Szalewski, Krzysztof Pałka, Paweł Kalinowski, Marcelo Gusmão Paraiso Cavalcanti, Ingrid Różyło-Kalinowska","doi":"10.1186/s12903-025-06760-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate and repeatable assessment of bone density is a critical factor in dental implant planning, as it influences decisions related to implant size, site preparation, and primary stability, ultimately affecting treatment outcomes and long-term osseointegration. The variability in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) gray values across different acquisition protocols can compromise measurement repeatability, challenging the reliability of preoperative bone assessments. This study aimed to assess the repeatability of a gray value-based bone density measurement tool along three-thirds of a virtual implant in CBCT under different acquisition protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three pork ribs (5 × 3 × 2 cm) were scanned three times each using a VistaVoxS 3D CBCT scanner under four acquisition protocols, varying field-of-view (5 × 5 and 13 × 5), kVp (98, 94, 79), mA (11, 9, 6), and voxel size (0.08 and 0.2 mm), resulting in 144 scans. A virtual implant (10 × 5.2 mm) was centered on each rib image, and gray values along the thirds of the implant were measured using AIS 3DAPP 5.0 software. Repeatability was assessed with Friedman's test, Kendall's agreement coefficient, and the chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean CBCT gray values in the cervical region were significantly lower regardless of the protocol (p ≤ 0.5). Individual exposures differed but showed very good agreement (0.89-0.83).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The bone density tool showed reliable gray value measurements across CBCT protocols, with field of view affecting repeatability more than voxel size. Significant gray value differences in the cervical region highlight the need for cautious interpretation in this area. Standardizing imaging settings is recommended to improve implant planning accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":9072,"journal":{"name":"BMC Oral Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"1549"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12505823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Oral Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06760-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accurate and repeatable assessment of bone density is a critical factor in dental implant planning, as it influences decisions related to implant size, site preparation, and primary stability, ultimately affecting treatment outcomes and long-term osseointegration. The variability in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) gray values across different acquisition protocols can compromise measurement repeatability, challenging the reliability of preoperative bone assessments. This study aimed to assess the repeatability of a gray value-based bone density measurement tool along three-thirds of a virtual implant in CBCT under different acquisition protocols.

Methods: Three pork ribs (5 × 3 × 2 cm) were scanned three times each using a VistaVoxS 3D CBCT scanner under four acquisition protocols, varying field-of-view (5 × 5 and 13 × 5), kVp (98, 94, 79), mA (11, 9, 6), and voxel size (0.08 and 0.2 mm), resulting in 144 scans. A virtual implant (10 × 5.2 mm) was centered on each rib image, and gray values along the thirds of the implant were measured using AIS 3DAPP 5.0 software. Repeatability was assessed with Friedman's test, Kendall's agreement coefficient, and the chi-square test.

Results: The mean CBCT gray values in the cervical region were significantly lower regardless of the protocol (p ≤ 0.5). Individual exposures differed but showed very good agreement (0.89-0.83).

Conclusions: The bone density tool showed reliable gray value measurements across CBCT protocols, with field of view affecting repeatability more than voxel size. Significant gray value differences in the cervical region highlight the need for cautious interpretation in this area. Standardizing imaging settings is recommended to improve implant planning accuracy.

不同采集方案下锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像中基于灰度值的骨密度测量的可重复性。
背景:准确和可重复的骨密度评估是牙科种植体规划的关键因素,因为它影响种植体大小、位置准备和初始稳定性的决定,最终影响治疗结果和长期骨整合。锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)灰度值在不同采集方案中的可变性会损害测量的可重复性,挑战术前骨骼评估的可靠性。本研究旨在评估基于灰度值的骨密度测量工具在不同采集方案下沿三分之二虚拟植入物在CBCT上的可重复性。方法:使用visstavoxs 3D CBCT扫描仪,在不同的视场(5 × 5和13 × 5)、kVp(98、94、79)、mA(11、9、6)和体素大小(0.08和0.2 mm)的四种采集方案下,对3个5 × 3 × 2 cm的猪排各扫描3次,共扫描144次。在每个肋骨图像中心放置一个虚拟种植体(10 × 5.2 mm),使用AIS 3DAPP 5.0软件测量种植体沿三分之一的灰度值。采用Friedman检验、Kendall一致系数和卡方检验评估重复性。结果:无论采用何种治疗方案,宫颈区的CBCT平均灰度值均显著降低(p≤0.5)。个体暴露不同,但显示非常好的一致性(0.89-0.83)。结论:骨密度工具在CBCT方案中显示可靠的灰度值测量,视野比体素大小对重复性的影响更大。宫颈区域显著的灰度值差异强调了在该区域谨慎解释的必要性。建议标准化成像设置以提高种植体规划的准确性。
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
BMC Oral Health
BMC Oral Health DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
481
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Oral Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of disorders of the mouth, teeth and gums, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信