Effect of exposure parameters and gutta-percha cone size on fracture-like artifacts in endodontically treated teeth on cone-beam computed tomography images.
Artifact
Cone-beam computed tomography
Root canal filling
Tube current
Tube voltage
Journal
Oral radiology
ISSN: 1613-9674
Titre abrégé: Oral Radiol
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 8806621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
received:
29
06
2019
accepted:
23
09
2019
pubmed:
5
10
2019
medline:
27
11
2020
entrez:
5
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To ascertain the effects of exposure parameters (tube current and tube voltage) and the gutta-percha cone (GPC) size on root fracture-like artifacts obtained with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Fracture-like artifacts appearing on CBCT images of nine extracted human mandibular premolars filled with GPCs of size #50 or #80 were analyzed using six exposure factors: two tube voltages (80 kV and 110 kV); and three tube currents (4 mA, 7 mA, and 10 mA). On axial images, the gray value (GV) was recorded at three points: the mesiobuccal portion (MBP) as the sound dentin, the mesial portion (MP) as the artifact line, and the water area (WA). The rate of decrease in the GV (RDGV) of the artifact line was calculated using the formula: RDGV (%) = (GV of MBP - GV of MP) × 100/(GV of MBP - GV of WA). Comparison of the #80 group and the #50 group with equal tube voltages and tube currents shows that artifact lines in the #80 group were more obvious than those in the #50 group. The artifact lines with 80 kV were markedly more visible than those with 110 kV for each tube current and GPC size. Tube current changes did not affect the artifact line for any tube voltage or GPC size. For the reduction of artifacts, we recommend selection of higher tube voltages and lower tube currents when taking CBCT images of teeth with each GPC size.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31583602
doi: 10.1007/s11282-019-00411-3
pii: 10.1007/s11282-019-00411-3
doi:
Substances chimiques
Root Canal Filling Materials
0
Gutta-Percha
9000-32-2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
344-348Références
Zhang Y, Zhang I, Zhu XR, Lee AK, Chambers M, Dong L. Reduction metal artefacts in cone-beam CT images by preprocessing projection data. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:924–32.
pubmed: 17161556
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.09.045
Hassan B, Metska ME, Ozok AR, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR. Detection of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth by a cone beam computed tomography scan. J Endod. 2009;35:719–22.
pubmed: 19410091
doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.01.022
Brito-Júnior M, Santos LA, Faria-e-Silva AL, Pereira RD, Sousa-Neto MD. Ex vivo evaluation of artifacts mimicking fracture lines on cone-beam computed tomography produced by different root canal seals. Int Endod J. 2014;47:26–31.
pubmed: 23621697
doi: 10.1111/iej.12121
Iikubo M, Nishioka T, Okura S, Kobayashi K, Sano T, Akitoshi K, et al. Influence of voxel size and scan field of view on fracture-like artifacts from gutta-percha obturated endodontically treated teeth on cone-beam computed tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016;122:631–7.
pubmed: 27765333
doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2016.07.014
Pauwels R, Araki K, Siewerdsen JH, Thongvigitmanee SS. Technical aspects of dental CBCT: state of the art. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140224.
pubmed: 25263643
doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20140224
Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, Hunter R, Benavides E, Samuelson DB, et al. Correction to effective dose of dental CBCT – a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20159003.
pubmed: 25874892
doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20140197
Iikubo M, Osano T, Sano T, Katsumata A, Ariji E, Kobayashi K, et al. Root canal filling materials spread pattern mimicking root fractures in dental CBCT images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015;120:521–7.
pubmed: 26346912
doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2015.06.030
Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D, Bruellman DD, Dranischnikow E, Schwanecke U, et al. Artifacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:265–73.
pubmed: 21697151
pmcid: 3520262
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/30642039
Chen CY, Chuang KS, Wu J, Lin HR, Li MJ. Beam hardening correction for computed tomography images using a postreconstruction method and equivalent tissue concept. J Digit Imaging. 2001;14:54–61.
pubmed: 11440255
pmcid: 3452760
doi: 10.1007/s10278-001-0003-2
Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106:930–8.
Iikubo M, Kobayashi K, Mishima A, Shimoda S, Daimaruya T, Igarashi C, et al. Accuracy of intraoral radiography, multidetector helical CT, and limited cone-beam CT for the detection of horizontal tooth root fracture. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108:e70–4.
pubmed: 19836716
doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.07.009
Khedmat S, Rouhi N, Drage N, Shokouhinejad N, Nekoofar MH. Evaluation of three imaging techniques for the detection of vertical root fractures in the absence and presence of gutta-percha root fillings. Int Endod J. 2012;45:1004–9.
pubmed: 22551491
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02062.x
Panjnoush M, Kheirandish Y, Kashani PM, Fakhar HB, Younesi F, Mallahi M. Effect of exposure parameters on metal artifacts in cone beam computed tomography. J Dent (Tehran). 2016;13:143–50.