Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric and diagnostic performance of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the study of the dental arches.
Materials and methods
Effective dose and dose to the main organs of the head and neck were evaluated by means of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) placed in an Alderson Rando anthropomorphic phantom and using a standard CBCT protocol and an optimised MSCT protocol. Five patients with occlusal plane ranging from 54 cm to 59 cm who needed close follow-up (range 1–3 months) underwent both examinations. Image quality obtained with CBCT and MSCT was evaluated.
Results
Effective dose and dose to the main organs of the head and neck were higher for MSCT than for CBCT. Image quality of CBCT was judged to be equivalent to that of MSCT for visualising teeth and bone but inferior for visualising soft tissues. Beam-hardening artefacts due to dental-care material and implants were weaker at CBCT than at MSCT.
Conclusions
When panoramic radiography is not sufficient in the study of the teeth and jaw bones, CBCT can provide identical information to MSCT, with a considerable dose reduction. MSCT is, however, indicated when evaluation of soft tissue is required.
Riassunto
Obiettivo
Scopo di questo lavoro è confrontare le performances dosimetriche e diagnostiche di tomografia computerizzata multidetettore (TCMD) e tomografia computerizzata a fascio conico (TCFC) nello studio delle arcate dentarie.
Materiali e metodi
Si è provveduto alla misurazione della dose alle strutture di capo e collo e della dose efficace con dosimetri a termoluminescenza (TLD) posti in un fantoccio antropomorfo Alderson Rando utilizzando un protocollo TCFC ed uno TCMD ottimizzato. Sono stati esaminati 5 pazienti, con circonferenza al piano occlusale entro un range prestabilito (54–59 cm) e che avevano necessità di effettuare controlli ravvicinati nel tempo (range 1-3 mesi), con entrambi i sistemi TC ed è stata valutata la qualità delle immagini ottenute.
Risultati
La dose efficace agli organi è superiore per la TCMD rispetto alla TCFC. La qualità delle immagini della TCFC è stata giudicata sovrapponibile alla TCMD nello studio dei denti e dell’osso, inferiore nella valutazione dei tessuti molli. Artefatti da indurimento del fascio dovuti alla presenza di materiale medicamentoso e protesico incidono negativamente sulla qualità dell’immagine maggiormente nel caso della TCMD rispetto alla TCFC.
Conclusioni
Lo studio delle strutture ossee può essere effettuato, se la radiografia ortopanoramica non è sufficiente, mediante TCFC, che fornisce informazioni sovrapponibili a quelle della TCMD con notevole risparmio di dose; la TCMD è indicata qualora sia necessario valutare anche i tessuti molli.
Similar content being viewed by others
References/Bibliografia
Bianchi SD, Roccuzzo M, Albrito F et al (1996) Dosi assorbite nella radiologia dentale. Radiol Med 92:114–121
Preda L, Rodriguez y Baena R, La Fianza A et al (1999) Computed tomography in dental implantation. Technical and methodological aspects. Radiol Med 98:447–453
Ludlow JB, Laster WS, See M et al (2007) Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy in cone beam computed tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103:534–542
Scribano E, Ascenti G, Mazziotti S et al (2003) Computed tomography in dental implantology: medico-legal implications. Radiol Med 105:92–99
Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A et al (1998) A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 8:1558–1564
Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P (2006) Clinical applications of conebeam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 72:75–80
Vile C, Mangini M, Strocchi S et al (2006) Dosimetric and image quality assessment of different acquisition protocols of a novel 64 slices CT scanner. Progress in biomedical optics and imaging 7:61423G.1–61423G.7
International Commission on Radiological Protection (1996) Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection: the skeleton. ICRP Publication n. 70, Pergamon Oxford
International Commission on Radiological Protection (1990) Recommendation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication n. 60, Pergamon Oxford
Villari N, Stecco A, Zatelli G (1999) Dosimetry in dental radiology: comparison of spiral computerized tomography and orthopantomography. Radiol Med 97:378–381
Doyle P, Martin CJ, Robertson J (2006) Techniques for measurement of dose width product in panoramic dental radiography. Br J Radiol 79:142–147
Schulze D, Heiland M, Thurmann H, Adam G (2004) Radiation exposure during midfacial imaging using 4- and 16-slice computed tomography, cone beam computed tomography and conventional radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:83–86
Lecomber AR, Yoneyama Y, Lovelock DJ et al (2001) Comparison of patient dose from imaging protocols for dental implant planning using conventional radiography and computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30:255–259
Mah JK, Danforth RA, Bumann A et al (2003) Radiation absorbed in maxillofacial imaging with a new dental computed tomography device. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 96:508–513
Cohnen M, Kemper J, Mobes O et al (2002) Radiation dose in dental radiology. Eur Radiol 12:634–637
Fanucci E, Leporace M, Di Costanzo G et al (2006) Multidetector CT and dentascan software: dosimetric evaluation and technique improvement. Radiol Med 111:130–138
Tsiklakis K, Donta C, Gavala S et al (2005) Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam CT. Eur J Radiol 56:413–417
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL et al (2006) Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-Cat. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:219–226
Hashimoto K, Arai Y, Iwai K et al (2003) A comparison of a new limited cone beam computed tomography machine for dental use with multidetector row helical CT machine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 95:371–377
Hashimoto K, Kawashima S, Araki M et al (2006) Comparison of image performance between cone-beam computed tomography for dental use and four-row multidetector helical CT. J Oral Sci 48:27–34
Loubele M, Guerrero ME, Jacobs R et al (2007) A comparison of jaw dimensional and quality assessments of bone characteristics with cone-beam CT, spiral tomography, and multi-slice spiral CT. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22:446–454
Heiland M, Pohlenz P, Blessmann M et al (2007) Cervical soft tissue imaging using a mobile CBCT scanner with a flat panel detector in comparison with corresponding CT and MRI data sets. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 104:814–820
Draenert FG, Coppenrath E, Herzog P et al (2007) 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 36:198–203
Strocchi S, Colli V, Novario R et al (2007) Dedicated dental volumetric and total body multislice computed tomography: a comparison of image quality and radiation dose. Progress in biomedical optics and imaging 8:65102I.1–65102I.8
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carrafiello, G., Dizonno, M., Colli, V. et al. Comparative study of jaws with multislice computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography. Radiol med 115, 600–611 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0520-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0520-5