Comparability of dental implant site ridge measurements using ultra-low-dose multidetector row computed tomography combined with filtered back-projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and model-based iterative reconstruction.
Anatomy, cross-sectional
Image-guided surgery
Imaging, three-dimensional
Multidetector row computed tomography
Radiation dosage
Journal
Oral radiology
ISSN: 1613-9674
Titre abrégé: Oral Radiol
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 8806621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2019
09 2019
Historique:
received:
20
07
2018
accepted:
20
09
2018
pubmed:
30
11
2018
medline:
8
8
2020
entrez:
29
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the linear measurements of edentulous ridges recorded from multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) images obtained by a previously untested ultra-low dose in combination with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). Three cadavers were imaged using a reference protocol with a standard dose and FBP (volume CT dose index (CTDIvol): 29.4 mGy) and two ultra-low-dose protocols, LD1 and LD2 (CTDIvol: 0.53 and 0.29 mGy). All test examinations were reconstructed with FBP, ASIR 50, ASIR 100, and MBIR. Linear measurements from the images of the edentulous ridges recorded from the test protocols were compared with those from the reference using a one-sample t test, Bland-Altman plots, and linear regression. Statistical significance was set at a p value of 0.05. The one-sample t test demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the measurements from the reference protocol and all test protocols. The difference was not clinically significant for the following three test protocols: LD1/FBP, LD1/ASIR 50, and LD2/FBP. Bland-Altman plots with linear regression showed no systematic variation between the measurements obtained with the reference protocol and these three test protocols. The lowest-dose protocol to demonstrate comparable measurements with a standard MDCT dose was CTDIvol 0.29 mGy with FBP. These results must be considered with caution for areas of the jaws with thin cortication. The results in areas of thin cortication should be verified by studies with larger sample sizes at such areas and comparison with true gold standard measurements.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30484207
doi: 10.1007/s11282-018-0350-z
pii: 10.1007/s11282-018-0350-z
pmc: PMC6685921
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
280-286Références
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999 Jun;57(6):690-4
pubmed: 10368094
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004 Mar-Apr;19(2):228-31
pubmed: 15101594
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999 Mar;87(3):369-74
pubmed: 10102603
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Apr;194(4):881-9
pubmed: 20308486
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008 Jul;106(1):106-14
pubmed: 18504152
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140197
pubmed: 25224586
Int J Prosthodont. 2018 Mar 28;31(5):465–470
pubmed: 29590663
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Apr;44(4):441-6
pubmed: 25680629
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018 Dec;47(8):20170477
pubmed: 29791199
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008 Jan;37(1):10-7
pubmed: 18195249
Acta Radiol. 2004 Dec;45(8):847-53
pubmed: 15690615
J Nucl Med Technol. 2008 Jun;36(2):57-68; quiz 75-6
pubmed: 18483143
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017 Apr;46(4):20160452
pubmed: 28059562
Eur Radiol. 2017 May;27(5):2225-2234
pubmed: 27655306
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016 Oct;11(10):1791-801
pubmed: 27255542
Acta Anat (Basel). 1978;102(1):60-7
pubmed: 676659
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Feb;40(2):67-75
pubmed: 21239568
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jan;194(1):191-9
pubmed: 20028923