Comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements in CBCT images with different field of views

M. Mehdizadeh, Ali Erfani, Parisa Soltani
{"title":"Comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements in CBCT images with different field of views","authors":"M. Mehdizadeh, Ali Erfani, Parisa Soltani","doi":"10.11606/issn.2357-8041.clrd.2022.194059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study sought to investigate the effect of the field of view (FOV) on linear measurements of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. Methods: In this in vitro study, five dry human skulls were used. After using red wax to simulate soft tissue, the skulls were scanned using Galileos CBCT scanner (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) with exposure parameters of 85 kVp and 21 mAs and voxel size of 0.280 mm; once with FOV of 15 cm × 8 cm and once again with 15 cm × 15 cm. The measured distances were the distance between the center of the bilateral mental foramen in the axial view (MM), the distance between the alveolar crest and the mandibular inferior border in the sagittal view on the midline (CB), and the depth of the socket of the left mandibular central incisor (L1). Descriptive statistics as well as Pearson’s correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05) using SPSS software (v. 25, IBM, NY, USA). Results: The measurements obtained with small and large FOV and with the dry skull were not significantly different (p > 0.05). The measurements obtained in small FOV had excellent correlation coefficient when compared with those obtained with the dry skull, with values of 0.890 for MM, 0.954 for CB, and 0.921 for L1 (p < 0.001). The measurements in large FOV also had excellent correlation coefficient when compared with those on the dry skull, with values of 0.894 for MM, 0.949 for CB, and 0.902 for L1 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: According to our findings, linear measurements obtained by CBCT scans in small and large FOVs were not significantly different than those on dry skulls. Since the linear measurements are accurate regardless of FOV size, selection of FOV must be based on patient factors, such as area of interest and radiation dose.","PeriodicalId":10204,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Laboratorial Research in Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Laboratorial Research in Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2357-8041.clrd.2022.194059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study sought to investigate the effect of the field of view (FOV) on linear measurements of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. Methods: In this in vitro study, five dry human skulls were used. After using red wax to simulate soft tissue, the skulls were scanned using Galileos CBCT scanner (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) with exposure parameters of 85 kVp and 21 mAs and voxel size of 0.280 mm; once with FOV of 15 cm × 8 cm and once again with 15 cm × 15 cm. The measured distances were the distance between the center of the bilateral mental foramen in the axial view (MM), the distance between the alveolar crest and the mandibular inferior border in the sagittal view on the midline (CB), and the depth of the socket of the left mandibular central incisor (L1). Descriptive statistics as well as Pearson’s correlation coefficient were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05) using SPSS software (v. 25, IBM, NY, USA). Results: The measurements obtained with small and large FOV and with the dry skull were not significantly different (p > 0.05). The measurements obtained in small FOV had excellent correlation coefficient when compared with those obtained with the dry skull, with values of 0.890 for MM, 0.954 for CB, and 0.921 for L1 (p < 0.001). The measurements in large FOV also had excellent correlation coefficient when compared with those on the dry skull, with values of 0.894 for MM, 0.949 for CB, and 0.902 for L1 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: According to our findings, linear measurements obtained by CBCT scans in small and large FOVs were not significantly different than those on dry skulls. Since the linear measurements are accurate regardless of FOV size, selection of FOV must be based on patient factors, such as area of interest and radiation dose.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同视场CBCT图像线性测量精度的比较
本研究旨在探讨视场(FOV)对锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像线性测量的影响。方法:采用5个干燥人头骨进行体外实验。用红蜡模拟软组织后,使用Galileos CBCT扫描仪(Sirona, Bensheim, Germany)对颅骨进行扫描,曝光参数为85 kVp和21 ma,体素大小为0.280 mm;一次视场为15厘米× 8厘米,另一次视场为15厘米× 15厘米。测量的距离分别为:轴向观双侧颏孔中心距离(MM)、矢状观中线上牙槽嵴与下颌下缘距离(CB)、左下颌中切牙窝深度(L1)。采用SPSS软件(v. 25, IBM, NY, USA),采用描述性统计和Pearson相关系数进行统计分析(α = 0.05)。结果:小视场、大视场及干颅骨测量无显著性差异(p < 0.05)。与干颅骨相比,小视场测量值具有良好的相关系数,MM值为0.890,CB值为0.954,L1值为0.921 (p < 0.001)。与干颅骨相比,大视场测量值也具有良好的相关系数,MM值为0.894,CB值为0.949,L1值为0.902 (p < 0.001)。结论:根据我们的研究结果,CBCT扫描在小视场和大视场上获得的线性测量结果与在干颅骨上的线性测量结果没有显著差异。由于无论视场大小如何,线性测量都是准确的,因此视场的选择必须基于患者的因素,例如感兴趣的区域和辐射剂量。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recorrências locais de tumores de glândulas salivares em uma população brasileira Utilização da distração óssea no tratamento de pacientes com Sequência de Pierre Robin Relação entre alterações ósseas detectadas na panorâmica e osteoporose Comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements in CBCT images with different field of views Antimicrobial photodynamic and photobiomodulation adjuvant therapies for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw – Report of two cases with long-term follow-up
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1