Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: an in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study.

IF 0.9 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

European Oral Research Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.26650/eor.20200079

Seval Bayrak, Emine Sebnem Kursun Cakmak, Hakan Kamalak

{"title":"Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: an in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study.","authors":"Seval Bayrak, Emine Sebnem Kursun Cakmak, Hakan Kamalak","doi":"10.26650/eor.20200079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: In radiological views, strong beam hardening and streaking artifacts occur due to high-density structures and polyenergetic X-ray beams, and these lead to misdiagnosis. This study was performed in vitro to compare the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of commonly used dental restorative materials by using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images with and without artifact reduction (AR) mode.Materials and methods: A total of 108 molar teeth were restored with nine different groups of restorative materials, with each group containing 12 teeth. Teeth were placed in a dry human mandible and scanned, one by one, via Planmeca 3D ProMax (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) with and without AR mode. Images were analyzed using ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD) to calculate the CNR.Results: CNR was calculated to be the highest in compomer (Glassiosite) images without AR mode (mean: 3.36) and with AR mode (mean: 3.61). CNR was calculated to be the lowest in amalgam (Tytin) images without AR mode (mean: 0.21) and with AR mode (mean: 0.23). A significant difference was found between materials in terms of CNR measurements (p ≤ 0.05). CNR measurements were increased after the AR mode application (p ≤ 0.05).Conclusion: AR mode was effective in reducing artifacts arising from dental materials on CBCT images, so it is necessary to use AR mode for correct diagnoses.","PeriodicalId":41993,"journal":{"name":"European Oral Research","volume":"54 1","pages":"36-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0f/47/eor-054-036.PMC7252535.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Oral Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20200079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose: In radiological views, strong beam hardening and streaking artifacts occur due to high-density structures and polyenergetic X-ray beams, and these lead to misdiagnosis. This study was performed in vitro to compare the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of commonly used dental restorative materials by using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images with and without artifact reduction (AR) mode.

Materials and methods: A total of 108 molar teeth were restored with nine different groups of restorative materials, with each group containing 12 teeth. Teeth were placed in a dry human mandible and scanned, one by one, via Planmeca 3D ProMax (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) with and without AR mode. Images were analyzed using ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD) to calculate the CNR.

Results: CNR was calculated to be the highest in compomer (Glassiosite) images without AR mode (mean: 3.36) and with AR mode (mean: 3.61). CNR was calculated to be the lowest in amalgam (Tytin) images without AR mode (mean: 0.21) and with AR mode (mean: 0.23). A significant difference was found between materials in terms of CNR measurements (p ≤ 0.05). CNR measurements were increased after the AR mode application (p ≤ 0.05).

Conclusion: AR mode was effective in reducing artifacts arising from dental materials on CBCT images, so it is necessary to use AR mode for correct diagnoses.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

不同牙科修复材料的对比噪声比:体外锥形束计算机断层扫描研究。

目的:在放射学上，由于高密度结构和多能x射线束，会出现强光束硬化和条纹伪影，这导致误诊。本研究采用锥形束ct (Cone Beam Computed Tomography, CBCT)图像，在体外比较常用牙体修复材料具有和不具有伪影还原(artificial reduction, AR)模式的对比噪声比(contrast-to-noise ratio, CNR)。材料与方法:采用9组修复材料修复108颗磨牙，每组12颗牙。将牙齿放置在干燥的人类下颌骨中，并通过Planmeca 3D ProMax (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland)逐个扫描，有或没有AR模式。使用ImageJ软件(National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD)对图像进行分析，计算CNR。结果:计算出无AR模式和有AR模式的合成物(Glassiosite)图像的CNR最高(平均值:3.36)。计算出无AR模式和有AR模式的银汞合金(Tytin)图像的CNR最低(平均值:0.21)。不同材料间CNR测量值差异有统计学意义(p≤0.05)。应用AR模式后CNR测量值升高(p≤0.05)。结论:AR模式能有效减少牙体材料在CBCT图像上产生的伪影，因此使用AR模式进行正确诊断是必要的。

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