CBCT-based bone quality assessment: Are Hounsfield units applicable?

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Pauwels, R ^a,b   Jacobs, R ^b   Singer, S R ^c   Mupparapu, M ^d  

^a CHULALONGKORN UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^b DEPARTMENT OF IMAGING AND PATHOLOGY   (Belgium)

^c RUTGERS SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Bone quality; Cone beam computed tomography; Dental implants; Hounsfield units

Indexed keywords

BONE DENSITY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; JAW; MICRO-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY;

BONE DENSITY; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; JAW; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; X-RAY MICROTOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84919725976     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140238     Document Type: Review

References (97)

1. Lambert FE, Weber HP, Susarla SM, Belser UC, Gallucci GO. Descriptive analysis of implant and prosthodontic survival rates with fixed implant-supported rehabilitations in the edentulous maxilla. J Periodontol 2009; 80: 1220-30. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.090109
2. Vercruyssen M, Marcelis K, Coucke W, Naert I, Quirynen M. Long-term, retrospective evaluation (implant and patient-centred outcome) of the two-implants-supported overdenture in the mandible. Part 1: survival rate. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 357-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01849.x
3. Chen H, Liu N, Xu X, Qu X, Lu E. Smoking, radiotherapy, diabetes and osteoporosis as risk factors for dental implant failure: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2013; 8: e71955. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071955
4. Jacobs R. Preoperative radiologic planning of implant surgery in compromised patients. Periodontol 2000 2003; 33: 12-25.
5. Merheb J, Van Assche N, Coucke W, Jacobs R, Naert I, Quirynen M. Relationship between cortical bone thickness or computerized tomography-derived bone density values and implant stability. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 612-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01880.x
6. Bass SL, Triplett RG. The effects of preoperative resorption and jaw anatomy on implant success. A report of 303 cases. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991; 2: 193-8.
7. de Oliveira RC, Leles CR, Lindh C, Ribeiro-Rotta RF. Bone tissue microarchitectural characteristics at dental implant sites. Part 1: identification of clinical-related parameters. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 981-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02243.x
8. Jemt T, Lekholm U. Implant treatment in edentulous maxilla: a five year follow-up report on patients with different degrees of jaw resorption. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995; 10: 303-11.
9. Quirynen M, Gijbels F, Jacobs R. An infected jawbone site compromising successful osseointegration. Periodontol 2000 2003; 33: 129-44.
10. Marx RE. A decade of bisphosphonate bone complications: what it has taught us about bone physiology. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29: e247-58. doi: 10.11607/jomi.te61
11. de Oliveira MA, Asahi DA, Silveira CA, Lima LA, Glick M, Gallottini M. The effects of zoledronic acid and dexamethasone on osseointegration of endosseous implants: histological and histomorphometrical evaluation in rats. Clin Oral Implants Res Jan 2014. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/clr.12335
12. Zuffetti F, Testori T, Capelli M, Rossi MC, Del Fabbro M. The topical administration of bisphosphonates in implant surgery: a randomized split-mouth prospective study with a follow-up up to 5 Years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Sep 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/cid.12151
13. Merheb J, Coucke W, Jacobs R, Naert I, Quirynen M. Influence of bony defects on implant stability. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 919-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01932.x
14. Ribeiro-Rotta RF, Lindh C, Pereira AC, Rohlin M. Ambiguity in bone tissue characteristics as presented in studies on dental implant planning and placement: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 789-801. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02041.x
15. Ribeiro-Rotta RF, Pereira AC, Oliveira GH, Freire MC, Leles CR, Lindh C. An exploratory survey of diagnostic methods for bone quality assessment used by Brazilian dental implant specialists. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37: 698-703. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02102.x
16. Engquist B, Bergendal T, Kallus T, Linden U. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseointegrated implants supporting overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988; 3: 129-34.
17. Jemt T, Book K, Lindén B, Urde G. Failures and complications in 92 consecutively inserted overdentures supported by Brånemark implants in severely resorbed edentulous maxillae: a study from prosthetic treatment to first annual check-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992; 7: 162-7.
18. Jaffin RA, Berman CL. The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: a 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 1991; 62: 2-4.
19. Lindh C, Petersson A, Rohlin M. Assessment of the trabecular pattern before endosseous implant treatment: diagnostic outcome of periapical radiography in the mandible. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996; 82: 335-43.
20. Benson BW, Prihoda TJ, Glass BJ. Variations in adult cortical bone mass as measured by a panoramic mandibular index. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 71: 349-56.
21. Klemetti E, Kolmakov S, Heiskanen P, Vainio P, Lassila V. Panoramic mandibular index and bone mineral densities in postmenopausal women. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993; 75: 774-9.
22. Norton MR, Gamble C. Bone classification: an objective scale of bone density using the computerized tomography scan. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 79-84.
23. Misch CE. Density of bone: effect on treatment plans, surgical approach, healing, and progressive boen loading. Int J Oral Implantol 1990; 6: 23-31.
24. Lekholm U, Zarb GA. Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, eds. Tissue integrated prosthesis; osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence; 1985. pp. 199-209.
25. Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Michiels K, Teughels W, Komárek A, van Steenberghe D. Impact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of failures up to abutment connection with modified surface oral implants. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 51-7.
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. Pauwels R, Araki K, Siewerdsen JH, Thongvigitmanee SS. Technical aspects of dental cone-beam CT: state of the art. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 44: 20140224. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20140224
28. Molteni R. Prospects and challenges of rendering tissue density in Hounsfield units for cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013; 116: 105-19. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2013.04.013
29. Mullen A, Kron T, Thomas J, Foroudi F. Variations in cone beam CT numbers as a function of patient size: in vivo demonstration in bladder cancer patients. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2010; 54: 505-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2010.02203.x
30. Srinivasan K, Mohammadi M, Shepherd J. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for adaptive radiotherapy treatment planning. J Med Biol Eng 2014; 34: 377-85.
31. Hatton J, McCurdy B, Greer PB. Cone beam computerized tomography: the effect of calibration of the Hounsfield unit number to electron density on dose calculation accuracy for adaptive radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol 2009; 54: N329-46. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/15/N01
32. Li J, Yao W, Xiao Y, Yu Y. Feasibility of improving cone-beam CT number consistency using a scatter correction algorithm. J Appl ClinMed Phys 2013; 14: 4346. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4346
33. Liu Y, Bäuerle T, Pan L, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Heiss C, et al. Calibration of cone beam CT using relative attenuation ratio for quantitative assessment of bone density: a small animal study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2013; 8: 733-9. doi: 10.1007/s11548-012-0803-5
34. Aranyarachkul P, Caruso J, Gantes B, Schulz E, Riggs M, Dus I, et al. Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 2. Quantitative cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20: 416-24.
35. Azeredo F, de Menezes LM, Enciso R, Weissheimer A, de Oliveira RB. Computed gray levels in multislice and cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144: 147-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.013
36. Bamba J, Araki K, Endo A, Okano T. Image quality assessment of three cone beam CT machines using the SEDENTEXCT CT phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20120445. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20120445
37. 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
38. Bujtár P, Simonovics J, Zombori G, Fejer Z, Szucs A, Bojtos A, et al. Internal or in-scan validation: a method to assess CBCT and MSCT gray scales using a human cadaver. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014; 117: 768-79. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2014.02.012
39. Cassetta M, Stefanelli LV, Di Carlo S, Pompa G, Barbato E. The accuracy of CBCT in measuring jaws bone density. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2012; 16: 1425-9.
40. Cassetta M, Stefanelli LV, Pacifici A, Pacifici L, Barbato E. How accurate is CBCT in measuring bone density? a comparative CBCT-CT in vitro study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014; 16: 471-8. doi: 10.1111/cid.12027
41. Chindasombatjaroen J, Kakimoto N, Shimamoto H, Murakami S, Furukawa S. Correlation between pixel values in a cone-beam computed tomographic scanner and the computed tomographic values in a multidetector row computed tomographic scanner. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011; 35: 662-5. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e31822d9725
42. Eskandarloo A, Abdinian M, Salemi F, Hashemzadeh Z, Safaei M. Effect of object location on the density measurement in conebeam computed tomography versus multislice computed tomography. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012; 9: S81-7.
43. Hohlweg-Majert B, Metzger MC, Kummer T, Schulze D. Morphometric analysis - cone beam computed tomography to predict bone quality and quantity. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011; 39: 330-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2010.10.002
44. 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: 829-36.
45. Katsumata A, Hirukawa A, Okumura S, Naitoh M, Fujishita M, Ariji E, et al. Relationship between density variability and imaging volume size in cone-beam computerized tomographic scanning of the maxillofacial region: an in vitro study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 107: 420-5. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.05.049
46. Lagravère MO, Fang Y, Carey J, Toogood RW, Packota GV, Major PW. Density conversion factor determined using a conebeam computed tomography unit NewTom QR-DVT 9000. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 407-9.
47. Lagravère MO, Carey J, Ben-Zvi M, Packota GV, Major PW. Effect of object location on the density measurement and Hounsfield conversion in a NewTom 3G cone beam computed tomography unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 305-8. doi:10.1259/dmfr/65993482
48. Mah P, Reeves TE, McDavid WD. Deriving Hounsfield units using grey levels in cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39: 323-35. doi:10.1259/dmfr/19603304
49. 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
50. Naitoh M, Hirukawa A, Katsumata A, Ariji E. Evaluation of voxel values in mandibular cancellous bone: relationship between cone-beam computed tomography and multislice helical computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 503-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01672.x
51. Naitoh M, Hirukawa A, Katsumata A, Ariji E. Prospective study to estimate mandibular cancellous bone density using largevolume cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 1309-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01950.x
52. Nishino K, Shimamoto H, Kakimoto N, Tsujimoto T, Chindasombatjaroen J, Murakami S, et al. Influence of an object's z-axis location and location on the axial plane on the voxel value representation and uniformity in cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014; 118: 619-24. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2014.08.010
53. Nomura Y, Watanabe H, Honda E, Kurabayashi T. Reliability of voxel values from cone-beam computed tomography for dental use in evaluating bone mineral density. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 558-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01896.x
54. Nomura Y, Watanabe H, Shirotsu K, Honda E, Sumi Y, Kurabayshi T. Stability of voxel values from cone-beam computed tomography for dental use in evaluating bone mineral content. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24: 543-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02420.x
55. Oliveira ML, Freitas DQ, Ambrosano GM, Haiter-Neto F. Influence of exposure factors on the variability of CBCT voxel values: a phantom study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20140128. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20140128
56. Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, Motroni A, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Reliability of voxel gray values in cone beam computed tomography for preoperative implant planning assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 1438-42.
57. Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT. Clin Oral Implants Res Dec 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/clr.12315
58. 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
59. Pauwels R, Stamatakis H, Manousaridis G, Walker A, Michielsen K, Bosmans H, et al. Development and applicability of a quality control phantom for dental cone-beam CT. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2011; 12: 3478. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v12i4.3478
60. Pauwels R, Nackaerts O, Bellaiche N, Stamatakis H, Tsiklakis K, Walker A, et al. Variability of dental cone beam CT grey values for density estimations. Br J Radiol 2013; 86: 20120135. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20120135
61. Plachtovics M, Bujtar P, Nagy K, Mommaerts M. High-quality image acquisition by double exposure overlap in dental cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014; 117: 760-7. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2014.02.024
62. Reeves TE, Mah P, McDavid WD. Deriving Hounsfield units using grey levels in cone beam CT: a clinical application. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 500-8. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/31640433
63. Sennerby L, Andersson P, Pagliani L, Giani C, Moretti G, Molinari M, et al. Evaluation of a novel cone beam computed tomography scanner for bone density examinations in preoperative 3D reconstructions and correlation with primary implant stability. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Dec 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/cid.12193
64. Silva IM, Freitas DQ, Ambrosano GM, Bóscolo FN, Almeida SM. Bone density: comparative evaluation of Hounsfield units in multislice and cone-beam computed tomography. Braz Oral Res 2012; 26: 550-6.
65. Spin-Neto R, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Variation in voxel value distribution and effect of time between exposures in six CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20130376. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20130376
66. Valiyaparambil JV, Yamany I, Ortiz D, Shafer DM, Pendrys D, Freilich M, et al. Bone quality evaluation: comparison of cone beam computed tomography and subjective surgical assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 1271-7.
67. Yamashina A, Tanimoto K, Sutthiprapaporn P, Hayakawa Y. The reliability of computed tomography (CT) values and dimensional measurements of the oropharyngeal region using cone beam CT: comparison with multidetector CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 245-51. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/45926904
68. Barone A, Covani U, Cornelini R, Gherlone E. Radiographic bone density around immediately loaded oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14: 610-15.
69. Brosh T, Yekaterina BE, Pilo R, Shpack N, Geron S. Can cone beam CT predict the hardness of interradicular cortical bone? Head Face Med 2014; 10: 12. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-10-12
70. Fuster-Torres MA, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Penarrocha-Diago M. Relationships between bone density values from cone beam computed tomography, maximum insertion torque, and resonance frequency analysis at implant placement: a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011; 26: 1051-6.
71. Kaya S, Yavuz I, Uysal I, Akkus Z. Measuring bone density in healing periapical lesions by using cone beam computed tomography: a clinical investigation. J Endod 2012; 38: 28-31. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.032
72. Lee S, Gantes B, Riggs M, Crigger M. Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 3. Bone quality evaluation during osteotomy and implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 208-12.
73. Simon JH, Enciso R, Malfaz JM, Roges R, Bailey-Perry M, Patel A. Differential diagnosis of large periapical lesions using conebeam computed tomography measurements and biopsy. J Endod 2006; 32: 833-7.
74. Song YD, Jun SH, Kwon JJ. Correlation between bone quality evaluated by cone-beam computerized tomography and implant primary stability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 59-64.
75. Tatli U, Salimov F, Kürkcü M, Akoʇlan M, Kurtoʇlu C. Does cone beam computed tomography-derived bone density give predictable data about stability changes of immediately loaded implants?: a 1-year resonance frequency follow-up study. J Craniofac Surg 2014; 25: e293-9. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000000727
76. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, Ganz SD, Hildebolt C, Scarfe WC; American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 113: 817-26. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2012.03.005
77. Harris D, Horner K, Gröndahl K, Jacobs R, Helmrot E, Benic GI, et al. E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 1243-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02441.x
78. European Commission. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology: evidence based guidelines, radiation protection publication 172. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2012.
79. American Association of Endodontists; American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Use of cone-beam computed tomography in endodontics Joint Position Statement of the American Association of Endodontists and the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011; 111: 234-7. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.11.012
80. European Society of Endodontology; Patel S, Durack C, Abella F, Roig M, Shemesh H, Lambrechts P, et al. European Society of Endodontology position statement: the use of CBCT in endodontics. Int Endod J 2014; 47: 502-4. doi: 10.1111/iej.12267
81. Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 267-71. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.11.028
82. Lettry S, Seedhom BB, Berry E, Cuppone M. Quality assessment of the cortical bone of the human mandible. Bone 2003; 32: 35-44.
83. Viberg B, Ryg J, Overgaard S, Lauritsen J, Ovesen O. Low bone mineral density is not related to failure in femoral neck fracture patients treated with internal fixation. Acta Orthop 2014; 85: 60-5. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.875360
84. Fazzalari NL, Parkinson IH. Fractal dimension and architecture of trabecular bone. J Pathol 1996; 178: 100-5.
85. Hua Y, Nackaerts O, Duyck J, Maes F, Jacobs R. Bone quality assessment based on cone beam computed tomography imaging. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 767-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01677.x
86. González-Martín O, Lee EA, Veltri M. CBCT fractal dimension changes at the apex of immediate implants placed using undersized drilling. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 954-7.
87. Huang Y, Van Dessel J, Liang X, Depypere M, ZhongW,Ma G, et al. Effects of immediate and delayed loading on periimplant trabecular structures: a cone beam CT evaluation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Apr 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/cid.12063
88. Torres SR, Chen CS, Leroux BG, Lee PP, Hollender LG, Schubert MM. Fractal dimension evaluation of cone beam computed tomography in patients with bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40: 501-5. doi:10.1259/ dmfr/14636637
89. Lee TC, Kashyap RL, Chu CN. Building skeleton models via 3-D medial surface axis thinning algorithms. CVGIP: Graph Model Image Process 1994; 56: 462-78.
90. Odgaard A, Gundersen HJG. Quantification of connectivity in cancellous bone, with special emphasis on 3-D reconstructions. Bone 1993; 14: 173-82.
91. Hildebrand T, Rüegsegger P. A new method for the modelindependent assessment of thickness in three-dimensional images. J Microsc 1997; 185: 67-75.
92. Hildebrand T, Rüegsegger P. Quantification of bone microarchitecture with the structure model index. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 1997; 1: 15-23.
93. Van Dessel J, Huang Y, Depypere M, Rubira-Bullen I, Maes F, Jacobs R. A comparative evaluation of cone beam CT and micro-CT on trabecular bone structures in the human mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20130145. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20130145
94. González-García R, Monje F. The reliability of cone-beam computed tomography to assess bone density at dental implant recipient sites: a histomorphometric analysis by micro-CT. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24: 871-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02390.x
95. Hsu JT, Wang SP, Huang HL, Chen YJ, Wu J, Tsai MT. The assessment of trabecular bone parameters and cortical bone strength: a comparison of micro-CT and dental cone-beam CT. J Biomech 2013; 46: 2611-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.08.004
96. Ibrahim N, Parsa A, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Aartman IH, Nambiar P. Influence of object location in different FOVs on trabecular bone microstructure measurements of human mandible: a cone beam CT study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20130329. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20130329
97. 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 human mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20130206.