在两台锥形束计算机断层扫描仪上测量人工骨缺损的准确性。比较研究

Gihan Omar , Walaa Hamed , Mostafa S. Ashmawy
{"title":"在两台锥形束计算机断层扫描仪上测量人工骨缺损的准确性。比较研究","authors":"Gihan Omar ,&nbsp;Walaa Hamed ,&nbsp;Mostafa S. Ashmawy","doi":"10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Several CBCT systems are currently on the market variable in their image quality and ability to visualize anatomic structures. Those systems differ from each other in detector design, patient scanning settings, and data reconstruction parameters. Moreover, other scanning and reconstruction factors including scan field of view (FOV), voxel size and the number of basis projections used for reconstruction have significant influence on image quality in CBCT. The aim of this study is to compare two CBCT systems regarding their linear measurements accuracy.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Eighteen bone defects were created in one dry skull by using a round diamond bur mounted on a high speed hand piece. The defects were fully injected with polyvinyl siloxane impression. The skull was scanned using Planmeca ProMax 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) and i-CAT next generation (Imaging Sciences international, Hatfield, PA, USA). Images were uploaded to a third party software (On Demand, Cyber med Inc. South Korea) for applying the measurements. Several measurements of each rubber impression material were done using the measurement tool on the cross sectional images in order to determine the maximum diameter. Then the impression material was removed carefully from the mandible by a dental probe and all the rubber balls were measured with a digital caliber to determine the actual maximum diameter (gold standard). Numerical collected data were explored for normality by checking the data distribution.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The results of the present study showed that the overall measurements by Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean measurement than the standard reference while i-CAT measurements showed non-statistically significant difference from the standard reference at all areas and also regarding the overall measurement. Regarding the overall error measurement and error percentage; Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean error and error percentage than I-CAT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>CBCT is highly accurate and reproducible in linear measurements in the axial and coronal image planes and in different areas of the maxillofacial region. According to the findings of the present study I-CAT is recommended when the purpose of the CBCT scan is to measure linear distances. This will result in lower patient radiation dose and faster scan time.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100562,"journal":{"name":"Future Dental Journal","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 141-145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.006","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of artificial bone defects measurements on two cone beam computed tomography scanners. A comparative study\",\"authors\":\"Gihan Omar ,&nbsp;Walaa Hamed ,&nbsp;Mostafa S. Ashmawy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Several CBCT systems are currently on the market variable in their image quality and ability to visualize anatomic structures. Those systems differ from each other in detector design, patient scanning settings, and data reconstruction parameters. Moreover, other scanning and reconstruction factors including scan field of view (FOV), voxel size and the number of basis projections used for reconstruction have significant influence on image quality in CBCT. The aim of this study is to compare two CBCT systems regarding their linear measurements accuracy.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Eighteen bone defects were created in one dry skull by using a round diamond bur mounted on a high speed hand piece. The defects were fully injected with polyvinyl siloxane impression. The skull was scanned using Planmeca ProMax 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) and i-CAT next generation (Imaging Sciences international, Hatfield, PA, USA). Images were uploaded to a third party software (On Demand, Cyber med Inc. South Korea) for applying the measurements. Several measurements of each rubber impression material were done using the measurement tool on the cross sectional images in order to determine the maximum diameter. Then the impression material was removed carefully from the mandible by a dental probe and all the rubber balls were measured with a digital caliber to determine the actual maximum diameter (gold standard). Numerical collected data were explored for normality by checking the data distribution.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The results of the present study showed that the overall measurements by Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean measurement than the standard reference while i-CAT measurements showed non-statistically significant difference from the standard reference at all areas and also regarding the overall measurement. Regarding the overall error measurement and error percentage; Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean error and error percentage than I-CAT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>CBCT is highly accurate and reproducible in linear measurements in the axial and coronal image planes and in different areas of the maxillofacial region. According to the findings of the present study I-CAT is recommended when the purpose of the CBCT scan is to measure linear distances. This will result in lower patient radiation dose and faster scan time.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future Dental Journal\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 141-145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.fdj.2018.05.006\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future Dental Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2314718018300168\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2314718018300168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目前市场上的几种CBCT系统在图像质量和解剖结构可视化能力方面存在差异。这些系统在检测器设计、患者扫描设置和数据重建参数方面各不相同。此外,扫描视场(FOV)、体素大小和用于重建的基投影数等其他扫描和重建因素对CBCT图像质量也有显著影响。本研究的目的是比较两种CBCT系统的线性测量精度。材料与方法将一个圆形的钻石钉固定在一个高速手片上,在一个干燥的颅骨上制造了18个骨缺损。用聚乙烯醇硅氧烷压模对缺陷进行了充分的注射。颅骨使用Planmeca ProMax 3D (Planmeca,赫尔辛基,芬兰)和i-CAT下一代(Imaging Sciences international, Hatfield, PA, USA)进行扫描。图像被上传到第三方软件(On Demand, Cyber med Inc.)。(韩国)进行测量。利用测量工具对每一种橡胶压印材料进行了多次测量,以确定其最大直径。然后用牙探针从下颌骨小心地取出印模材料,并用数字口径测量所有橡胶球,以确定实际最大直径(金标准)。通过对数据分布的检验,探讨数值采集数据的正态性。结果本研究结果显示,Planmeca的整体测量值均高于标准参比,而i-CAT测量值与标准参比在各区域及整体测量值均无统计学差异。关于总体误差测量和误差百分比;Planmeca的平均误差和错误率均高于I-CAT。结论cbct在颌面不同区域的轴面、冠状面线性测量具有较高的准确度和重复性。根据本研究的发现,当CBCT扫描的目的是测量线性距离时,推荐使用I-CAT。这将导致更低的病人辐射剂量和更快的扫描时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy of artificial bone defects measurements on two cone beam computed tomography scanners. A comparative study

Introduction

Several CBCT systems are currently on the market variable in their image quality and ability to visualize anatomic structures. Those systems differ from each other in detector design, patient scanning settings, and data reconstruction parameters. Moreover, other scanning and reconstruction factors including scan field of view (FOV), voxel size and the number of basis projections used for reconstruction have significant influence on image quality in CBCT. The aim of this study is to compare two CBCT systems regarding their linear measurements accuracy.

Materials and methods

Eighteen bone defects were created in one dry skull by using a round diamond bur mounted on a high speed hand piece. The defects were fully injected with polyvinyl siloxane impression. The skull was scanned using Planmeca ProMax 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) and i-CAT next generation (Imaging Sciences international, Hatfield, PA, USA). Images were uploaded to a third party software (On Demand, Cyber med Inc. South Korea) for applying the measurements. Several measurements of each rubber impression material were done using the measurement tool on the cross sectional images in order to determine the maximum diameter. Then the impression material was removed carefully from the mandible by a dental probe and all the rubber balls were measured with a digital caliber to determine the actual maximum diameter (gold standard). Numerical collected data were explored for normality by checking the data distribution.

Results

The results of the present study showed that the overall measurements by Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean measurement than the standard reference while i-CAT measurements showed non-statistically significant difference from the standard reference at all areas and also regarding the overall measurement. Regarding the overall error measurement and error percentage; Planmeca showed statistically significantly higher mean error and error percentage than I-CAT.

Conclusion

CBCT is highly accurate and reproducible in linear measurements in the axial and coronal image planes and in different areas of the maxillofacial region. According to the findings of the present study I-CAT is recommended when the purpose of the CBCT scan is to measure linear distances. This will result in lower patient radiation dose and faster scan time.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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