scholarly journals Comparison of a Dental Cone Beam CT with a Multi-detector Row CT on Effective Doses and Physical Image Quality

2011 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yutaka Yoshida ◽  
Kenji Tokumori ◽  
Kazutoshi Okamura ◽  
Kazunori Yoshiura
2021 ◽  
pp. 20210042
Author(s):  
Ayman Al-Okshi ◽  
Keith Horner ◽  
Madeleine Rohlin

Objectives: To apply the ROBIS tool for assessment of risk of bias (RoB) in systematic reviews (SRs) in a meta-review on effective doses (EDs) in dental and maxillofacial cone beam CT. Methods: Three electronic databases and reference lists of included SRs were searched. Eligible SRs were classified as having low, high or unclear RoB. Findings of SRs were synthesised and data from primary studies combined to relate ED to field of view (FOV) and operating potential (kV). Results: Seven SRs were included: three displayed low RoB, three high and one had unclear RoB. Only one SR related ED to image quality. Deficiencies in reporting of eligibility criteria, study selection and synthesis of results in SRs were identified. Median ED for three FOV categories differed significantly (p < 0.001) but there was no significant difference in median ED between three operating potential groups. Conclusion: The ROBIS tool should have a role for meta-reviews of different aspects of radiology. The disappointing results for RoB might be remedied by developing standards to improve the quality of reporting of primary dosimetry studies and of SRs. There is a continuing need to perform dosimetry studies, although relating ED to image quality or diagnostic accuracy would add value. Advances in knowledge: This meta-review is the first in radiology to implement ROBIS to assess RoB in SRs of ED and identified that the trustworthiness of some SRs is questionable. The results underpin the importance of FOV dimensions as a determinant of ED in CBCT.


2010 ◽  
Vol 194 (2) ◽  
pp. W193-W201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lifeng Yu ◽  
Thomas J. Vrieze ◽  
Michael R. Bruesewitz ◽  
James M. Kofler ◽  
David R. DeLone ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 170
Author(s):  
James O’Halloran ◽  
Paddy Gilligan ◽  
Sinead Cleary ◽  
Susan Maguire ◽  
Gerald O’Connor ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (6Part1) ◽  
pp. 061910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uros Stankovic ◽  
Marcel van Herk ◽  
Lennert S. Ploeger ◽  
Jan-Jakob Sonke

2018 ◽  
Vol 127 ◽  
pp. S1000-S1001
Author(s):  
A. Abuhaimed ◽  
C.J. Martin ◽  
O. Demirkaya

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 20190336
Author(s):  
Miss Fei Wang ◽  
Xiaoyan Xie ◽  
Gang Li ◽  
Zuyan Zhang

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the image quality of cone beam CT (CBCT) under different exposure parameters and the relationship between contrast-to-noise and visibility of eight anatomical structures. Methods: CBCT images for the evaluation of subjective image quality were acquired on an anthropopathic phantom containing a human skeleton embedded in soft tissue equivalent materials using 25 exposure protocols. Visibility of eight anatomical structures was evaluated by five independent observers. Using the SEDENTEXCT IQ Image Quality phantom, the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated by ImageJ software. Results: A reduction on the visibility of anatomical structures was seen under lower exposure parameters. However, for 84% of the protocols, visibility of anatomical structures remained acceptable even under some lower parameter settings. As CNR increased, the visibility of anatomical structures also increased correspondingly. A change point could be found in the CNR interval 29.42–36.51 after which the visibility of anatomical structures no longer increases with the increase of CNR. Conclusions: Although CNR decrease under a lower exposure parameter, the image quality often remained acceptable at exposure levels below the manufacture’s recommended settings. It is possible to standardize subjective image quality by physical factors. Currently, it is not possible to predetermine a change point CNR value due to different CBCT machine and variation of diagnostic tasks.


2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 20180357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danieli Moura Brasil ◽  
Ruben Pauwels ◽  
Wim Coucke ◽  
Francisco Haiter-Neto ◽  
Reinhilde Jacobs

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document