Analysis of linear measurement accuracy obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom VG)

Background: One of the major uses of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is presurgical implant planning. Linear measurement is used for the determination of the quantity of alveolar bone (height and width). Linear measurements are used in orthodontic analysis and definition of jaw tumor size. The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of the linear measurement of CBCT (Newtom VG) in the axial and coronal planes, with two different voxel sizes. Materials and Methods: In this accuracy diagnostic study, 22 anatomic landmarks in four dry human skulls were marked by gutta-percha. Fifteen linear measurements were obtained using a digital caliper. These were considered to be the gold standard (real measurement). The skulls were scanned by CBCT (Newtom VG) at two settings: (a) Voxel size 0.3 mm (b) voxel size 0.15 mm High Resolution (HR). The radiographic distance measurements were made in the axial and coronal sections by three observers. The radiographic measurements were repeated two weeks later for evaluation of intraobserver reliability. SPSS software version 17 was used for data analysis. The level of significance was considered to be 5% (P ≤ 0.05). Results: The mean differences of real and radiographic measurements were -0.10±0.99 mm in the axial sections, -0.27±1.07 mm in the coronal sections, +0.14±1.44 mm in the axial (HR) sections, and 0.02±1.4 mm in the coronal (HR) sections. The intraclass correlation (ICC) for CBCT measurements in the axial sections was 0.9944, coronal sections 0.9941, axial (HR) sections 0.9935, and coronal (HR) sections 0.9937. The statistical analysis showed high interobserver and intraobserver reliability (P ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: CBCT (Newtom VG) is highly accurate and reproducible in linear measurements in the axial and coronal image planes and in different areas of the maxillofacial region. According to the findings of the present study, a CBCT scan with a larger voxel size (0.3 mm in comparison to 0.15 mm) is recommended when the purpose of the CBCT scan is to measure linear distances. This will result in lower patient radiation dose and faster scan time.

[1]  M Kortesniemi,et al.  Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. , 2008, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[2]  Allan G Farman,et al.  Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3D images. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[4]  K Araki,et al.  Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial X-ray cone beam CT scanner (CB MercuRay): system configuration and physical properties. , 2004, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[5]  K. Orhan,et al.  Comparison of linear and angular measurements using two-dimensional conventional methods and three-dimensional cone beam CT images reconstructed from a volumetric rendering program in vivo. , 2011, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[6]  P. Mozzo,et al.  A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results , 1998, European Radiology.

[7]  C H Kau,et al.  Three-dimensional cone beam computerized tomography in orthodontics. , 2005, Journal of orthodontics.

[8]  H M Pinsky,et al.  Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. , 2006, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[9]  C. Karlo,et al.  Accuracy of linear intraoral measurements using cone beam CT and multidetector CT: a tale of two CTs. , 2012, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[10]  C. Lascala,et al.  Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). , 2004, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[11]  A. Farman,et al.  What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? , 2008, Dental clinics of North America.

[12]  J Brief,et al.  Clinical indications for digital volume tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery. , 2002, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[13]  S. Brooks,et al.  Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. , 2006, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[14]  P Sukovic,et al.  Cone beam computed tomography in craniofacial imaging. , 2003, Orthodontics & craniofacial research.

[15]  Seyed Ahmad Fatemitabar,et al.  Multichannel computed tomography versus cone-beam computed tomography: linear accuracy of in vitro measurements of the maxilla for implant placement. , 2010, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[16]  M W Vannier,et al.  Craniofacial measurements based on 3D-CT volume rendering: implications for clinical applications. , 2004, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[17]  Reinhilde Jacobs,et al.  State-of-the-art on cone beam CT imaging for preoperative planning of implant placement , 2006, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[18]  Kostas Tsiklakis,et al.  Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam CT. , 2005, European journal of radiology.

[19]  S A Stratemann,et al.  Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. , 2008, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[20]  K Yamamoto,et al.  Development of dento-maxillofacial cone beam X-ray computed tomography system. , 2003, Orthodontics & craniofacial research.