Evaluating cone cut in rectangular collimation in intraoral radiography: application of ALADA and radiation stewardship.
Cone cut
Diagnostics
Radiograph
Rectangular collimator
Journal
Clinical oral investigations
ISSN: 1436-3771
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Investig
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9707115
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
26
08
2022
accepted:
11
07
2023
medline:
11
9
2023
pubmed:
4
8
2023
entrez:
3
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rectangular collimation is a popular method used in intraoral radiography to reduce patient exposure to ionizing radiation. One of the perceived drawbacks of rectangular collimation is the possibility of an increase in cone cut errors ultimately impacting the diagnostic value of the radiographs. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore the frequency of cone cut errors in radiographs taken using a rectangular collimator. Radiographs taken using PSP plates at Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam in the Netherlands by staff and students from January to December 2015 were assessed for cone cut errors. The radiographs were grouped as bitewings, front teeth, inferior premolars and molars, and superior premolars and molars and categorized as no cone cut, cone cut but diagnostically usable, and cone cut but diagnostically not usable. The results were entered into Microsoft Excel and analyzed thereafter. A total of 53,684 radiographs were assessed, 79% had no cone cut errors and consequently 21% had some degree of cone cut. However, the diagnostic value was unaffected in 18% of the radiographs with cone cut. Only 3% of the radiographs were deemed diagnostically unusable due to cone cut. The most common area of cone cut was in the premolar and molar areas while cone cut in the front teeth was least likely to be diagnostically unusable. Cone cut from the use of a rectangular collimator does not seem to result in an increase of diagnostically unusable radiographs. Thus, rectangular collimation should be preferred as it decreases the amount of radiation exposure to the patient while producing diagnostically usable radiographs and thus allowing the dental professional to adhere to the ALADA principle and practice radiation stewardship. Scientific rationale for the study: rectangular collimation is a method used to reduce patient exposure to ionizing radiation; however, this benefit is negligible if radiographs must be retaken due to cone cut errors that make the radiograph diagnostically unusable. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the frequency of cone cut in radiographs taken using a rectangular collimator. cone cut was observed in 21% of the radiographs; however, only 3% of the radiographs were considered diagnostically unusable. rectangular collimation does not result in a high number of diagnostically unusable radiographs and should be used to reduce patient exposure to ionizing radiation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37537518
doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-05158-0
pii: 10.1007/s00784-023-05158-0
pmc: PMC10492766
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
5391-5402Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (1990) Implementation of the principle of as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) for medical and dental personnel. NCRP; NCRP Report No. 107, Bethesda, MD
Shetty A, Almeida F, Ganatra S, Senior A, Pacheco-Pereira C (2019) Evidence on radiation dose reduction using rectangular collimation: a systematic review. Int Dent J 69(2):84–97
doi: 10.1111/idj.12411
pubmed: 29959778
Horton PS, Sippy FH, Nelson JF, Kohout FJ, Kienzle GC (1983) A comparison of rectangular and cylindrical collimation for intraoral radiographs. J Dent Educ 47:771–773
doi: 10.1002/j.0022-0337.1983.47.12.tb01735.x
pubmed: 6582105
Parrott LA, Ng SY (2011) A comparison between bitewing radiographs taken with rectangular and circular collimators in UK military dental practices: a retrospective study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 40:102–109
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/86968802
pubmed: 21239573
pmcid: 3520300
Shannon SA (1987) Rectangular versus cylindrical collimation. A study of cone cuts on radiographs. Dent Hyg (Chic) 61(4):172–5
pubmed: 3471570
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, STROBE Initiative (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 147(8):573–577
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010
Benchimol EI, Smeeth L, Guttmann A, Harron K, Moher D et al (2015) The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med 12(10):e1001885
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001885
pubmed: 26440803
pmcid: 4595218
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, White SC (2008) Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 international commission on radiological protection recommendations regarding dose calculation. J Am Dent Assoc 139(9):1237–1243
doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0339
pubmed: 18762634
Patel JR (1979) Intraoral radiographic errors. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 48(5):479–483
doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(79)90081-1
pubmed: 290948
Horn-Ross PL, Ljung BM, Morrow M (1997) Environmental factors and the risk of salivary gland cancer. Epidemiology 8(4):414–419
doi: 10.1097/00001648-199707000-00011
pubmed: 9209856
Wingren G, Hallquist A, Hardell L (1997) Diagnostic x-ray exposure and female papillary thyroid cancer: a pooled analysis of two Swedish studies. Eur J Cancer Prev 6(6):550–556
doi: 10.1097/00008469-199712000-00010
pubmed: 9496457
Memon A, Rogers I, Paudyal P, Sundin J (2019) Dental x-rays and the risk of thyroid cancer and meningioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current epidemiological evidence. Thyroid 29(11):1572–1593
doi: 10.1089/thy.2019.0105
pubmed: 31502516
Xu P, Luo H, Huang GL, Yin XH, Luo SY, Song JK (2015) Exposure to ionizing radiation during dental x-rays is not associated with risk of developing meningioma: a meta-analysis based on seven case-control studies. PLoS One 10(2):e0113210
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113210
pubmed: 25658814
pmcid: 4319947
Longstreth WT Jr, Phillips LE, Drangsholt M, Koepsell TD, Custer BS, Gehrels JA, van Belle G (2004) Dental X-rays and the risk of intracranial meningioma: a population-based case-control study. Cancer 100(5):1026–1034
doi: 10.1002/cncr.20036
pubmed: 14983499
Freyche S, Vazquez L (2023) Radiographies intraorales : étude de qualité [Intraoral radiography: qualitative study]. Swiss Dent J 133(2):89–96
pubmed: 36723432
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2022. Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship. [online] Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/core-elements/index.html (Accessed 1 June 2022).
Oenning AC, Jacobs R, Salmon B (2021) ALADAIP, beyond ALARA and towards personalized optimization for paediatric cone-beam CT. Int J Pediatr Dent 31(5):676–678
doi: 10.1111/ipd.12797
Fdiworlddental.org. 2022. Radiation Safety in Dentistry | FDI. [online] Available at: https://www.fdiworlddental.org/radiation-safety-dentistry (Accessed 27 May 2022).