A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 67-75

  Al Ekrish, A A ^a   Ekram, M ^b  

^a KING SAUD UNIVERSITY   (Saudi Arabia)

^b Cairo University   (Egypt)

Author keywords

Cone beam CT; Dental implants; Reproducibility of results; Spiral CT

Indexed keywords

EID: 78751532284     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/27546065     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 1998; 8: 1558-1564.
2. Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 245-248.
3. Araki K, Maki K, Seki K, Sakamaki K, Harata Y, Sakaino R, et al. Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial X-ray cone beam CT scanner (CB MercuRay): system configuration and physical properties. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33: 51-59.
4. Fuchs T, Kalender WA. On the correlation of pixel noise, spatial resolution and dose in computed tomography: theoretical prediction and verification by simulation and measurement. Physica Medica 2003; 19: 153-164.
5. van Daatselaar AN, van der Stelt PF, Weenen J. Effect of number of projections on image quality of local CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33: 361-369.
6. Katsumata A, Hirukawa A, Okumura S, Naitoh M, Fujishita M, Ariji E, et al. Effects of image artifacts on gray-value density in limited-volume cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007; 104: 829-836.
7. Kalender WA. The use of flat-panel detectors for CT imaging. Radiology 2003; 43: 379-387.
8. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 228-231.
9. Loubele M, Van Assche N, Carpentier K, Maes F, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, et al. Comparative localized linear accuracy of small-field cone beam CT and multislice CT for alveolar bone measurements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105: 512-518.
10. Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 10-17.
11. Cavalcanti MG, Haller JW, Vannier MW. Three-dimensional computed tomography landmark measurement in craniofacial surgical planning: experimental validation in vitro. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999; 57: 690-694.
12. Naitoh M, Katsumata A, Mitsuya S, Kamemoto H, Ariji E. Measurement of mandibles with microfocus X-ray computerized tomography and compact computerized tomography for dental use. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 239-246.
13. Hueman EM, Noujeim ME, Langlais R, Prihoda TJ, Miller FR. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in determining the location of the genial tubercle. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007; 137: 115-118.
14. Kim KD, Jeong HG, Choi SH, Hwang EH, Park CS. Effect of mandibular positioningonpreimplant sitemeasurementof themandible in reformatted CT. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003; 23: 177-183.
15. Dantas JA, Montebello Filho A, Campos PSF. Computed tomography for dental implants: the influence of the gantry angle and mandibular positioning on the bone height and width. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005; 34: 9-15.
16. Sforza NM, Franchini F, Lamma A, Botticelli S, Ghigi G. Accuracy of computed tomography for the evaluation of mandibular sites prior to implant placement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007; 27: 589-595.
17. Naitoh M. Re: Questions from OMF; radiology post-grad student. E-mail to Asma Al-Ekrish. 8 April 2009.
18. Jaffray DA, Siewerdsen JH. Cone-beam computed tomography with a flat-panel imager: initial performance characterization. Med Phys 2000; 27: 1311-1323.
19. Seeram E. Computed tomography. Physical principles, clinical applications, and quality control. Second edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2001.
20. Siewerdsen JH, Jaffray DA. Cone-beam computed tomography with a flat-panel imager: magnitude and effects of x-ray scatter. Med Phys 2001; 28: 220-231.
21. Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM Jr, Boone JM. The essential physics of medical imaging. Second edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002.