Effect of Slice Thickness on the Accuracy of Linear Measurements Made on Cone Beam Computed Tomography Images (InVitro)

M. Moshfeghi, M. Amintavakoli, Dara Ghaznavi, A. Ghaznavi
{"title":"Effect of Slice Thickness on the Accuracy of Linear Measurements Made on Cone Beam Computed Tomography Images (InVitro)","authors":"M. Moshfeghi, M. Amintavakoli, Dara Ghaznavi, A. Ghaznavi","doi":"10.22037/JDS.V34I2.24683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is applied for the imaging of the maxillofacial and dental structures, particularly for surgical treatments and dental implants. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of slice thickness on the accuracy of CBCT linear measurements. Methods: In this diagnostic accuracy study, forty-two titanium pins with the same dimensions were inserted into seven dry sheep mandibles. The length of the pins before the insertion was carefully measured by a digital caliper, (0.01mm accuracy). Imaging of the mandible performed using CBCT New Tom VGi. After image reconstruction by NNT Viewer, linear measurements were made on cross-sectional slices (thicknesses of 0.125, 0.5, 1 and 2mm) by three radiologists. The accuracy of measurements assessed using descriptive indices and compared between different slice thicknesses by repeated measures ANOVA.Results: Repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant difference between different slice thicknesses (P=0.024). According to the least significant difference (LSD) test, the difference in absolute errors was significant in all thicknesses (P=0.024). Measurements at 0.125 mm thickness were significantly different from others, with a higher error rate (mean absolute error=0.17). Measurements at 0.5mm thickness showed a significant difference with those at 0.125 and 2mm (mean absolute error=0.15). Measurements at 2mm thickness were significantly different from those at 0.125 mm thickness (mean absolute error=0.13).The average error rate was lower in 2mm thickness and the measurements were more accurate.Conclusion: A statistically significant difference was seam between CBCT measurements and actual sizes in different slice thicknesses. The differences were below 1mm, and clinically acceptable.","PeriodicalId":21563,"journal":{"name":"Shahid Beheshti University Dental Journal","volume":"68 1","pages":"100-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shahid Beheshti University Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/JDS.V34I2.24683","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is applied for the imaging of the maxillofacial and dental structures, particularly for surgical treatments and dental implants. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of slice thickness on the accuracy of CBCT linear measurements. Methods: In this diagnostic accuracy study, forty-two titanium pins with the same dimensions were inserted into seven dry sheep mandibles. The length of the pins before the insertion was carefully measured by a digital caliper, (0.01mm accuracy). Imaging of the mandible performed using CBCT New Tom VGi. After image reconstruction by NNT Viewer, linear measurements were made on cross-sectional slices (thicknesses of 0.125, 0.5, 1 and 2mm) by three radiologists. The accuracy of measurements assessed using descriptive indices and compared between different slice thicknesses by repeated measures ANOVA.Results: Repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant difference between different slice thicknesses (P=0.024). According to the least significant difference (LSD) test, the difference in absolute errors was significant in all thicknesses (P=0.024). Measurements at 0.125 mm thickness were significantly different from others, with a higher error rate (mean absolute error=0.17). Measurements at 0.5mm thickness showed a significant difference with those at 0.125 and 2mm (mean absolute error=0.15). Measurements at 2mm thickness were significantly different from those at 0.125 mm thickness (mean absolute error=0.13).The average error rate was lower in 2mm thickness and the measurements were more accurate.Conclusion: A statistically significant difference was seam between CBCT measurements and actual sizes in different slice thicknesses. The differences were below 1mm, and clinically acceptable.
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
层厚对锥束ct图像线性测量精度的影响(InVitro)
目的:锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)应用于颌面和口腔结构的成像,特别是在外科治疗和种植牙方面。本研究的目的是评估切片厚度对CBCT线性测量精度的影响。方法:对7只绵羊下颌骨置入42根相同尺寸的钛针进行诊断准确性研究。插入前的引脚长度由数字卡尺仔细测量,(0.01mm精度)。使用CBCT新汤姆VGi进行下颌骨成像。用NNT Viewer重建图像后,由三名放射科医生对0.125、0.5、1和2mm厚度的横截面切片进行线性测量。使用描述性指标评估测量的准确性,并通过重复测量方差分析比较不同切片厚度之间的准确性。结果:重复测量方差分析显示不同切片厚度间差异有统计学意义(P=0.024)。经最小显著差异(LSD)检验,各厚度的绝对误差差异均显著(P=0.024)。厚度为0.125 mm时的测量结果与其他测量结果有显著差异,误差较高(平均绝对误差=0.17)。0.5mm厚度的测量结果与0.125和2mm的测量结果有显著差异(平均绝对误差=0.15)。2mm厚度测量值与0.125 mm厚度测量值差异显著(平均绝对误差=0.13)。2mm厚度的平均错误率较低,测量精度较高。结论:不同切片厚度的CBCT测量值与实际尺寸有统计学差异。差异小于1mm,临床可接受。
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
The Effects of Propolis on Discoloration of Teeth Orthodontic Management of a Severely Rotated Maxillary Central Incisor with a Modified Whip Appliance in Mixed Dentition Period D-1 Gene Polymorphism in Salivary Gland Tumors Dimensional Accuracy of Polyvinyl Siloxane Impression Materials Considering Impression Techniques– A Literature Review Comparison of salivary level of leptin in chronic periodontitis patients and healthy controls
×
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