Influence of object location in different FOVs on trabecular bone microstructure measurements of human mandible: A cone beam CT study

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2014, Pages

  Ibrahim, N ^a,b   Parsa, A ^a   Hassan, B ^a   Van Der Stelt, P ^a   Aartman, I H A ^a   Nambiar, P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EQUIPMENT; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MANDIBLE; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; TRABECULAR BONE;

CONE BEAM CT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; MANDIBLE; TRABECULAR BONE;

BONE DENSITY; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MANDIBLE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT;

EID: 84893849611     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20130329     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Fanuscu MI, Chang TL. Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of human cadaver bone: microstructural data from maxilla and mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 213-18. (Pubitemid 40109806)
2. Manske SL, Macdonald HM, Nishiyama KK, Boyd SK, McKay HA. Clinical tools to evaluate bone strength. Clin Rev Bone Miner Metab 2010; 8: 122-34.
3. Minkin C, Marinho VC. Role of the osteoclast at the boneimplant interface. Adv Dent Res 1999; 13: 49-56.
4. Sakka S, Coulthard P. Bone quality: a reality for the process of osseointegration. Implant Dent 2009; 18: 480-5. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3181bb840d
5. Ibrahim N, Parsa A, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Diagnostic imaging of trabecular bone microstructure for oral implants: a literature review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20120075. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20120075
6. Bryant JA, Drage NA, Richmond S. Study of the scan uniformity from an i-CAT cone beam computed tomography dental imaging system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 365-74. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/13227258
7. Nackaerts O, Maes F, Yan H, Couto Souza P, Pauwels R, Jacobs R. Analysis of intensity variability in multislice and cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 873-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02076.x
8. Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, Motroni A, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Influence of cone beam CT scanning parameters on grey value measurements at an implant site. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 79884780. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/79884780
9. Maes F, Collignon A, Vandermeulen D, Marchal G, Suetens P. Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16: 187-98. doi: 10.1109/42.563664 (Pubitemid 127762930)
10. Rinkel J, Gerfault L, Est̀eve F, Dinten JM. A new method for X-ray scatter correction: first assessment on a cone-beam CT experimental setup. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52: 4633-52. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/15/018 (Pubitemid 47103147)
11. Cann CE. Quantitative CT for determination of bone mineral density: a review. Radiology 1988; 166: 509-22. doi: 10.1148/radiology.166.2.3275985 (Pubitemid 18030768)
12. Draenert FG, Coppenrath E, Herzog P, M̈ uller S, Mueller-Lisse UG. Beam hardening artefacts occur in dental implant scans with the NewTom cone beam CT but not with the dental 4-row multidetector CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007; 36: 198-203. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/32579161 (Pubitemid 46999234)
13. Nithiananthan S, Schafer S, Uneri A, Mirota DJ, Stayman JW, Zbijewski W, et al. Demons deformable registration of CT and cone-beam CT using an iterative intensity matching approach. Med Phys 2011; 38: 1785-98.
14. Tsutsumi K, Chikui T, Okamura K, Yoshiura K. Accuracy of linear measurement and the measurement limits of thin objects with cone beam computed tomography: effects of measurement directions and of phantom locations in the fields of view. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011; 26: 91-100.
15. 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: 291-4. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/25500850 (Pubitemid 40288455)
16. Yu JJ, Kim GT, Choi YS, Hwang EH, Paek J, Kim SH, et al. Accuracy of a cone beam computed tomography-guided surgical stent for orthodontic mini-implant placement. Angle Orthod 2012; 82: 275-83. doi: 10.2319/060811-374.1
17. Ibrahim N, Parsa A, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Aartman IH, Wismeijer D. Accuracy of trabecular bone microstructural measurement at planned dental implant sites using cone-beam CT datasets. Clin Oral Implants Res Apr 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/clr.12163
18. Chöel L, Last D, Duboeuf F, Seurin MJ, Lissac M, Briguet A, et al. Trabecular alveolar bone microarchitecture in the human mandible using high resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33: 177-82. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/42933309
19. Hassan B, Couto Souza P, Jacobs R, de Azambuja Berti S, van der Stelt P. Influence of scanning and reconstruction parameters on quality of three-dimensional surface models of the dental arches from cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 2010; 14: 303-10. doi: 10.1007/s00784-009-0291-3
20. Tjong W, Kazakia GJ, Burghardt AJ, Majumdar S. The effect of voxel size on high-resolution peripheral computed tomography measurements of trabecular and cortical bone microstructure. Med Phys 2012; 39: 1893-903. doi: 10.1118/1.3689813
21. Klink T, Regier M, van Stevendaal U, Grass M, Adam G, Begemann P. Accelerating image acquisition in 64-MDCT: the influence of scan parameters on image resolution and quality in a phantom study. Clin Imaging 2012; 36: 334-44. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2011.11.006
22. Bechara B, McMahan CA, Moore WS, Noujeim M, Geha H, Teixeira FB. Contrast-to-noise ratio difference in small field of view cone beam computed tomography machines. J Oral Sci 2012; 54: 227-32.
23. Vandenberghe B, Luchsinger S, Hostens J, Dhoore E, Jacobs R, SEDENTEXCT Project Consortium. The influence of exposure parameters on jawbone model accuracy using cone beam CT and multislice CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 466-74. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/81272805
24. Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM. Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140: e25-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.012
25. Hunter AK, McDavid WD. Characterization and correction of cupping effect artefacts in cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 217-23. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/19015946
26. Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D, Bruellmann DD, Dranischnikow E, Schwanecke U, et al. Artefacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40: 265-73. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/30642039
27. Bouxsein ML, Boyd SK, Christiansen BA, Guldberg RE, Jepsen KJ,M̈ uller R. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res 2010; 25: 1468-86. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.141
28. Ibrahim N, Parsa A, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Aartman IH, Wismeijer D. The effect of scan parameters on cone beam CT trabecular bone microstructural measurements of the human mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20130206. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20130206
29. Wirth AJ, M̈ uller R, van Lenthe GH. The discrete nature of trabecular bone microarchitecture affects implant stability. J Biomech 2012; 45: 1060-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.024