Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i11.9842

Keywords:

Rapid prototyping; Cone beam computed tomograph; Voxel size; Soft tissue simulation.

Abstract

This study compared the acquisition protocols of the Conical Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) system, to assess the influence on image accuracy by different voxel sizes and the presence of soft tissue. Tomographic acquisition was performed in a fresh (F) and dry (D) pork jaw with voxel sizes of 0.4, 0.3 and 0.25 mm. The gold standard was obtained by scanning dry jaws covered with barium sulfate with a voxel size of 0.25 mm. The images were treated in the MIMICS® program, and noise areas were removed manually, using a fixed threshold for the purpose of generating 3D printing windows. Each window was virtually overlaid with the gold standard using the MeshLab software, obtaining absolute error values ​​between the meshes, generating a map of discrepancies. Significant differences were found between windows D 0.30 vs. F 0.30, D 0.30 vs. F 0.25, D 0.30 vs. D 0.25, D 0.30 vs. F 0.40, F 0.30 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.40, D 0.25 vs. F 0.40, D 0.25 vs. D 0.40 and F 0.40 vs. D 0.40, (p <0.05). It was observed that the dry jaw windows showed a lower mean and standard deviation when compared to the fresh jaw windows. The 0.25 mm voxel protocol showed the most accurate result and the presence of soft tissues influenced the accuracy of the image when some protocols were compared statistically.

References

Ahmed, M., & Ali, S. (2019). Computer guided temporomandibular joint reconstruction of Kaban III hemifacial microsomia with anotia: A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep, 57, 52-56.

Alsharbaty, M. H. M., Alikhasi, M., Zarrati, S., & Shamshiri, A. R. (2019). A clinical comparative study of 3-dimensional accuracy between digital and conventional implant impression techniques. J Prosthodont, 28(4), e902-e908.

Barbero, B. R., Ureta, E. S. (2011). Comparative study of different digitization techniques and their accuracy. Computer-Aided Desing, 43(2), 188-206.

Bibb, R., Winder, J. (2010). A review of the issues surrounding three-dimensional computed tomography for medical modelling using rapid prototyping techniques. Radiography, 16(1), 78-83.

Bombeccari, G. P., Candotto, V., Giannì, A. B., Carinci, F., & Spadari, F. (2019). Accuracy of the cone beam computed tomography in the detection of bone invasion in patients with oral cancer: a systematic review. Eurasian J Med, 51(3), 298-306.

Brüllmann, D., & Schulze, R. K. (2015). Spatial resolution in CBCT machines for dental/maxillofacial applications-what do we know today? Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 44(1), 20140204.

Chai, J., Liu, X., Schweyen, R., Setz, J., Pan, S., Liu, J., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Accuracy of implant surgical guides fabricated using computer numerical control milling for edentulous jaws: a pilot clinical trial. BMC oral health, 20(1), 288.

Damstra, J., Fourie, Z., Slater, J. J. R. H., & Ren, Y. (2010). Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomography-derived surface models of different voxel sizes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 137(1), 16.e1-16.e6.

Dawood, A., Patel, S., & Brown, J. (2009). Cone beam CT in dental practice. Br Dent J, 207(1), 23-8. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.560. PMID: 19590551.

De Souza, L. R. M. F., Faintuch, S., Nicola, H., Bekhor, D., Tiferes, D. A., Goldman, S. M., Ajzen, A. S., & Szejnfeld, J. (2004). A tomografia computadorizada helicoidal no diagnóstico da litíase ureteral. Rev Imagem, 26(4), 315-321.

Doyle, S., Wiltz, M. J. & Kraut, R. A. (2015). Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and multi-slice spiral computed tomography bone density measurements in the maxilla and mandible. N Y State Dent J, 81(4), 42-5.

Fernandes, T. M., Adamczyk, J., Poleti, M. L., Henriques, J. F., Friedland, B., & Garib, D. G. (2015). Comparison between 3D volumetric rendering and multiplanar slices on the reliability of linear measurements on CBCT images: an in vitro study. J Appl Oral Sci, 23(1), 56-63.

García-Sanz, V., Bellot-Arcís, C., Hernández, V., Serrano-Sánchez, P., Guarinos, J., & Paredes-Gallardo, V. (2017). Accuracy and Reliability of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Linear and Volumetric Mandibular Condyle Measurements. A Human Cadaver Study. Scientific reports, 7(1), 11993.

Hassan, B., Souza, C. P., Jacobs, R., Berti, S. A., & Van der Stelt, P. (2010). Influence of scanning and reconstruction parameters on quality of three-dimensional surface models of the dental arches from cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig, 14(3), 303-10.

Hassan, R., Aziz, A. A., Ralib, A. R. M., & Saat, A. (2011). Computed tomography of blunt spleen injury: a pictorial review. Malay J Med Sci, 18(1), 60–67.

Hatcher, D C. (2010). Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. J Am Dent Assoc, 141(Suppl 3), 3S-6S.

Juerchott, A., Saleem, M. A., Hilgenfeld, T., Freudlsperger, C., Zingler, S., Lux, C. J., Bendszus, M., & Heiland, S. (2018). 3D cephalometric analysis using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: validation of accuracy and reproducibility. Sci Rep, 8(1), 13029.

Kamburoğlu, K., & Yüksel, S. (2011). A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector CT and cone beam CT in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 40(7), 466–9.

Loubele, M., Asseche, N. V., Carpentier, K., Maes, F., Jacobs, R., Steenberghe, D. V., & Suetens, P. (2008). Comparative localized linear accuracy of small-field cone-beam CT and multislice CT for alveolar bone measurements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 105(4), 512-8.

Liang, X., Lambrichts, I., Sun, Y., Denis, K., Hassan, B., Li, L., Pauwels, R., & Jacobs, R. (2010). A comparative evaluation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multi-Slice CT (MSCT). Part II: On 3D model accuracy. Eur J Radiol, 75(2), 270-4.

Maret, D., Telmon, N., Peters, O. A., Lepage, B., Treil, J., Inglèse, J. M., Peyre, A., Kahn, J. L., & Sixou, M. (2012). Effect of voxel size on the accuracy of 3D reconstructions with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 41(8), 649-55.

Morea, C., Hayek, J. E., Oleskovicz, C., Dominguez, G. C., & Chilvarquer, I. (2011). Precise insertion of orthodontic miniscrews with a stereolithographic surgical guide based on cone beam computed tomography data: a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 26(4), 860-5.

Panzarella, F. K., Junqueira, J. L. C., Oliveira, L. B., Araujo, N. S., & Costa, C. (2011). Accuracy assessment of the axial images obtained from cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 40(6), 369-78.

Pitale, U., Mankad, H., Pandey, R., Pal, P. C., Dhakad, S., & Mittal, A. (2020). Comparative evaluation of the precision of cone-beam computed tomography and surgical intervention in the determination of periodontal bone defects: A clinicoradiographic study. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology, 24(2), 127–34.

Ponce-Garcia, C., Ruellas, A., Cevidanes, L., Flores-Mir, C., Carey, J. P., & Lagravere-Vich, M. (2020). Measurement error and reliability of three available 3D superimposition methods in growing patients. Head & face medicine, 16(1), 1

Skjerven, H., Riis, U. H., Herlofsson, B. B., & Ellingsen, J. E. (2019). In vivo accuracy of implant placement using a full digital planning modality and stereolithographic guides. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 34(1), 124-32.

Taft, R. M., Kondor, S. & Grant, G. T. (2011). Accuracy of rapid prototype models for head and neck reconstruction. J Prosthet Dent, 106 (6), 399-408.

Van der Meer, W. J., Vissink, A., Raghoebar, G. M., & Visser, A. (2012). Digitally designed surgical guides for placing extraoral implants in the mastoid area. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 27(3), 703-7.

Watanabe, H., Honda, E., & Kurabayashi, T. (2010). Modulation transfer function evaluation of cone beam computed tomography for dental use with the oversampling method. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 39(1), 28-32.

Weitz, J., Deppe, H., Stopp, S., Lueth, T., Mueller, S., & Hohlweg-Majert, B. (2011). Accuracy of templates for navigated implantation made by rapid prototyping with DICOM datasets of cone beam computer tomography (CBCT). Clin Oral Investig, 15(6), 1001-6.

Yi, J., Sun, Y., Li, Y., Li, C., Li, X., & Zhao, Z. (2017). Cone-beam computed tomography versus periapical radiograph for diagnosing external root resorption: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Angle Orthod, 87(2), 328-37.

Zeng, F. H., Xu, Y. Z., Fang, L., & Tang, X. S. (2012). Reliability of three dimensional resin model by rapid prototyping manufacturing and digital modeling. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue, 21(1), 53-6.

Downloads

Published

13/11/2020

How to Cite

Corazza, P. F. L. ., Baeder, F. M. ., Silva, D. F., Albuquerque, A. C. L. de, Silva, J. V. L. ., Junqueira, J. L. C., & Panzarella, F. K. (2020). Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models. Research, Society and Development, 9(11), e2649119842. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i11.9842

Issue

Section

Health Sciences