An ex vivo study of automated motion artefact correction and the impact on cone beam CT image quality and interpretability.

OBJECTIVES To assess the impact of head motion artefacts and an automated artefact-correction system on cone beam CT (CBCT) image quality and interpretability for simulated diagnostic tasks. METHODS A partially dentate human skull was mounted on a robot simulating four types of head movement (anteroposterior translation, nodding, lateral rotation, and tremor), at three distances (0.75, 1.5, and 3 mm) based on two movement patterns (skull returning/not returning to the initial position). Two diagnostic tasks were simulated: dental implant planning and detection of a periapical lesion. Three CBCT units were used to examine the skull during the movements and no-motion (control): Cranex 3Dx (CRA), Orthophos SL 3D (ORT), and X1 without (X1wo) and with (X1wi) an automated motion artefact-correction system. For each diagnostic task, 88 examinations were performed. Three observers, blinded to unit and movement, scored image quality: presence of stripe artefacts (present/absent), overall unsharpness (present/absent), and image interpretability (interpretable/non-interpretable). κ statistics assessed interobserver agreement, and descriptive statistics summarized the findings. RESULTS Interobserver agreement for image interpretability was good (average κ = 0.68). Regarding dental implant planning, X1wi images were interpretable by all observers, while for the other units mainly the cases with tremor were non-interpretable. Regarding detection of a periapical lesion, besides tremor, most of the 3 mm movements based on the "not returning" pattern were also non-interpretable for CRA, ORT, and X1wo. For X1wi, two observers scored 1.5 mm tremor and one observer scored 3 mm tremor as non-interpretable. CONCLUSIONS The automated motion artefact-correction system significantly enhanced CBCT image quality and interpretability.

[1]  Claudia Borri,et al.  Metal and motion artifacts by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in dental and maxillofacial study , 2015, La radiologia medica.

[2]  J H Siewerdsen,et al.  WE-AB-BRA-08: Correction of Patient Motion in C-Arm Cone-Beam CT Using 3D-2D Registration. , 2016, Medical physics.

[3]  D Brüllmann,et al.  Spatial resolution in CBCT machines for dental/maxillofacial applications-what do we know today? , 2015, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[5]  R Jacobs,et al.  CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable? , 2015, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[6]  Anton Umek,et al.  Suitability of Smartphone Inertial Sensors for Real-Time Biofeedback Applications , 2016, Sensors.

[7]  A. Wenzel,et al.  Movement characteristics in young patients and the impact on CBCT image quality. , 2016, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[8]  A. Wenzel,et al.  Standardized method to quantify the variation in voxel value distribution in patient-simulated CBCT data sets. , 2015, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[9]  T. Marchant,et al.  Reduction of motion artefacts in on-board cone beam CT by warping of projection images. , 2011, The British journal of radiology.

[10]  Cosimo Nardi,et al.  Motion artefacts in cone beam CT: an in vitro study about the effects on the images. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.

[11]  A Wenzel,et al.  Variation in voxel value distribution and effect of time between exposures in six CBCT units. , 2014, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[12]  R Schulze,et al.  Artefacts in CBCT: a review. , 2011, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[13]  Joseph O Deasy,et al.  Qualitative Evaluation of Fiducial Markers for Radiotherapy Imaging , 2015, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[14]  Hossein Rajabi,et al.  Correction of head movements in positron emission tomography using point source tracking system: a simulation study , 2011, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  Ann Wenzel,et al.  Detection of patient movement during CBCT examination using video observation compared with an accelerometer-gyroscope tracking system. , 2017, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[16]  S. Blinder,et al.  Investigation of Subject Motion Encountered During a Typical Positron Emission Tomography Scan , 2006, 2006 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[17]  A Gahleitner,et al.  Cone beam CT: a current overview of devices. , 2013, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[18]  Berthold K. P. Horn,et al.  Determining Optical Flow , 1981, Other Conferences.

[19]  A. Farman,et al.  Maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography: essence, elements and steps to interpretation. , 2012, Australian dental journal.

[20]  Ann Wenzel,et al.  Patient movement and motion artefacts in cone beam computed tomography of the dentomaxillofacial region: a systematic literature review. , 2016, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology.

[21]  Ulrich Schwanecke,et al.  Automated detection of patient movement during a CBCT scan based on the projection data. , 2015, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology.

[22]  John L. Barron,et al.  Determining Optical Flow for Large Motions Using Parametric Models in a Hierarchical Framework , 2007 .

[23]  Tomáš Hanzelka,et al.  Reduction of the negative influence of patient motion on quality of CBCT scan. , 2010, Medical hypotheses.

[24]  A. Wenzel,et al.  Patient movement characteristics and the impact on CBCT image quality and interpretability. , 2018, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[25]  A. Wenzel,et al.  Validity of wax and acrylic as soft-tissue simulation materials used in in vitro radiographic studies. , 2012, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[26]  A Wenzel,et al.  Cone beam CT image artefacts related to head motion simulated by a robot skull: visual characteristics and impact on image quality. , 2013, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[27]  Jaroslav Dusek,et al.  Movement of the patient and the cone beam computed tomography scanner: objectives and possible solutions. , 2013, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology.