Cargando…
Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: At present, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has become a substitute for computed tomography (CT) in dental procedures. The metallic materials used in dentistry can produce artifacts due to the beam hard-ening phenomenon. These artifacts decrease the quality of images. In th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3445314/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22991636 http://dx.doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2012.011 |
_version_ | 1782243807045091328 |
---|---|
author | Esmaeili, Farzad Johari, Masume Haddadi, Pezhman Vatankhah, Mehdi |
author_facet | Esmaeili, Farzad Johari, Masume Haddadi, Pezhman Vatankhah, Mehdi |
author_sort | Esmaeili, Farzad |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND AIMS: At present, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has become a substitute for computed tomography (CT) in dental procedures. The metallic materials used in dentistry can produce artifacts due to the beam hard-ening phenomenon. These artifacts decrease the quality of images. In the present study, the number of artifacts as a result of beam hardening in the images of dental implants was compared between two NewTom VG and Planmeca Promax 3D Max CBCT machines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An implant drilling model was used in the present study. The implants (Dentis) were placed in the canine, premolar and molar areas. Scanning procedures were carried out by two CBCT machines. The corresponding sections (coronal and axial) of the implants were evaluated by two radiologists. The number of artifacts in each image was determined using the scale provided. Mann-Whitney U test was used for two-by-two comparisons at a significance level of P<0.05. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in beam hardening artifacts in axial and coronal sections between the two x-ray machines (P<0.001), with a higher quality in the images produced by the NewTom VG. CONCLUSION: Given the higher quality of the images produced by the NewTom VG x-ray machine, it is recommended for imaging of patients with extensive restorations, multiple prostheses or previous implant treatments. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3445314 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Tabriz University of Medical Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34453142012-09-18 Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners Esmaeili, Farzad Johari, Masume Haddadi, Pezhman Vatankhah, Mehdi J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIMS: At present, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has become a substitute for computed tomography (CT) in dental procedures. The metallic materials used in dentistry can produce artifacts due to the beam hard-ening phenomenon. These artifacts decrease the quality of images. In the present study, the number of artifacts as a result of beam hardening in the images of dental implants was compared between two NewTom VG and Planmeca Promax 3D Max CBCT machines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An implant drilling model was used in the present study. The implants (Dentis) were placed in the canine, premolar and molar areas. Scanning procedures were carried out by two CBCT machines. The corresponding sections (coronal and axial) of the implants were evaluated by two radiologists. The number of artifacts in each image was determined using the scale provided. Mann-Whitney U test was used for two-by-two comparisons at a significance level of P<0.05. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in beam hardening artifacts in axial and coronal sections between the two x-ray machines (P<0.001), with a higher quality in the images produced by the NewTom VG. CONCLUSION: Given the higher quality of the images produced by the NewTom VG x-ray machine, it is recommended for imaging of patients with extensive restorations, multiple prostheses or previous implant treatments. Tabriz University of Medical Sciences 2012 2012-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3445314/ /pubmed/22991636 http://dx.doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2012.011 Text en © 2012 The Authors; Tabriz University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Esmaeili, Farzad Johari, Masume Haddadi, Pezhman Vatankhah, Mehdi Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title | Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title_full | Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title_fullStr | Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title_full_unstemmed | Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title_short | Beam Hardening Artifacts: Comparison between Two Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanners |
title_sort | beam hardening artifacts: comparison between two cone beam computed tomography scanners |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3445314/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22991636 http://dx.doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2012.011 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT esmaeilifarzad beamhardeningartifactscomparisonbetweentwoconebeamcomputedtomographyscanners AT joharimasume beamhardeningartifactscomparisonbetweentwoconebeamcomputedtomographyscanners AT haddadipezhman beamhardeningartifactscomparisonbetweentwoconebeamcomputedtomographyscanners AT vatankhahmehdi beamhardeningartifactscomparisonbetweentwoconebeamcomputedtomographyscanners |