Accuracy of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes

Implant Dentistry

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 150-155

  Torres, Marianna Guanaes Gomes ^a   Campos, Paulo Sérgio Flores ^a   Segundo, Nilson Pena Neto ^a   Navarro, Marcus ^b   Crusoé Rebello, Iêda ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF BAHIA   (Brazil)

^b Federal Institute of Bahia   (Brazil)

Author keywords

cone beam computed tomography; tomography; voxel

Indexed keywords

ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS; ANATOMIC LANDMARK; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CEPHALOMETRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; EDENTULOUSNESS; FIDUCIAL MARKER; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MANDIBLE; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; RADIOGRAPHY; STANDARD; TOOTH ARCH; TOOTH IMPLANTATION;

ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS; ANATOMIC LANDMARKS; CALIBRATION; CEPHALOMETRY; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL ARCH; DENTAL IMPLANTATION, ENDOSSEOUS; FIDUCIAL MARKERS; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; JAW, EDENTULOUS; MANDIBLE; PATIENT CARE PLANNING;

EID: 84859162468     PISSN: 10566163     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31824bf93c     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Pinsky HM, Dyda S, Pinsky RW, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:410-416. (Pubitemid 44904797)
2. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc. 2006;72:75-80. (Pubitemid 43326970)
3. Connor SEJ, Arscott T, Berry J, et al. Precision and accuracy of low-dose CT protocols in the evaluation of skull landmarks. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36: 270-276. (Pubitemid 47218405)
4. Mischkowski RA, Pulsfort R, Ritter L, et al. Geometric accuracy of a newly developed cone-beam device for maxillofacial imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;104:551-559.
5. Patel S, Dawood A, Pitt Ford T, et al. The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int Endod J. 2007;40:818-830.
6. Liedke GS, Silveira HED, Silveira HLD, et al. Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to evaluate simulated external root resorption. J Endod. 2009;35:233-235.
7. Stratemann SA, Huang JC, Maki K, et al. Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37: 80-93.
8. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, et al. Accuracy in measurements of distance using limited cone-beam com-puterized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:228-231. (Pubitemid 38561060)
9. Lam EWN, Ruprecht A, Yang J. Comparison of two-dimensional orthoradially reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography for dental implant treatment planning. J Prosthet Dent. 1995;74:42-46.
10. Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B. Measurements of distances related to the mandibular canal in radiographs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1995;6:96-103.
11. Wyatt CCL, Pharoah MJ. Imaging techniques and image interpretation for dental implant treatment. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:442-452. (Pubitemid 128513402)
12. 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. (Pubitemid 40352812)
13. Tyndall DA, Brooks SL, Hill CH, et al. Selection criteria for dental implant site imaging: A position of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000;89:630-637.
14. Loubele M, Van Assche N, Carpentier K, 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.
15. Kamburoglu K, Kihc C, Yüksel SP. Measurements of mandibular canal region obtained by cone-beam computed tomography: A cadaveric study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:e34-e42.
16. Lund H, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl HG. Accuracy and precision of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography Accuitomo- tomograms obtained with different reconstruction techniques. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:379-386.
17. Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM. Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:291-294. (Pubitemid 40288455)
18. Damstra J, Fourie Z, Slater JJRH, Ren Y. Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomographyderived surface models of different voxel size. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137:16.e1-16.e6.
19. Kamburoglu K, Kolsuz E, Kurt H, et al. Accuracy of CBCT measurements of a human skull. J Digit Imaging. 2011;24: 787-793.
20. Nasel CJO, Pretterklieber M, Gahleitner A, et al. Osteometry of the mandible performed using dental MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 1999;20:1221-1227. (Pubitemid 29400529)
21. Al-Ekrish AA, Ekram M. 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. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010:40: 67-75.
22. Baumgaertel S, Palomo JM, Palomo L, et al. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136:19-25; discussion 25-28.
23. Sun Z, Smith T, Kortam S, et al. Effect of bone thickness on alveolar boneheight measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139:e117-e127.
24. Bou Serhal C, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, et al. Localization of the mandibular canal using conventional spiral tomography: A human cadaver study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2001;12:230-236. (Pubitemid 33723225)