Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 54 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 36 - 41 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.26650/eor.20200079 İndeks Tarihi: 30-06-2020
Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study
Öz: In radiological views, strong beam hardening and streaking artifacts occur dueto high-density structures and polyenergetic X-ray beams, and these lead tomisdiagnosis. This study was performed in vitro to compare the contrast-to-noiseratio (CNR) of commonly used dental restorative materials by using Cone BeamComputed Tomography (CBCT) images with and without artifact reduction (AR)mode.Materials and MethodsA total of 108 molar teeth were restored with nine different groups of restorativematerials, with each group containing 12 teeth. Teeth were placed in a dry humanmandible and scanned, one by one, via Planmeca 3D ProMax (Planmeca, Helsinki,Finland) with and without AR mode. Images were analyzed using ImageJ software(National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD) to calculate the CNR.ResultsCNR was calculated to be the highest in compomer (Glassiosite) images without ARmode (mean: 3.36) and with AR mode (mean: 3.61). CNR was calculated to be thelowest in amalgam (Tytin) images without AR mode (mean: 0.21) and with AR mode(mean: 0.23). A significant difference was found between materials in terms of CNRmeasurements (p ≤ 0.05). CNR measurements were increased after the AR modeapplication (p ≤ 0.05).ConclusionAR mode was effective in reducing artifacts arising from dental materials on CBCTimages, so it is necessary to use AR mode for correct diagnoses
Anahtar Kelime: .
Öz: Farklı dental restoratif materyallerin kontrast noise oranı: bir in- vitro konik işınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi çalışması. Amaç: Radyografik görüntülerde, kuvvetli ışın sertleşmesi ve saçılma artefaktları yüksek dansiteli yapılardan ve polienerjik X ışını demetinden kaynaklanır ve yanlış tanıya neden olur. Bu çalışma yaygın kullanılan dental restoratif materyallerin in vitro olarak Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT) görüntülerinde artefakt azaltma (AA) modu kullanılarak ve kullanılmadan kontrast noise oranını (KNO) kıyaslamak için yapıldı. Materyal ve Metod: Her biri 12 dişten oluşan toplamda 108 molar diş dokuz farklı grup restoratif materyalle restore edildi. Dişlerin her biri kuru insan mandibulasına yerleştirilerek AA modu kullanılarak ve kullanılmadan Planmeca 3D ProMax(Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) ile tarandı. Görüntüler ImageJ (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda) programı kullanılarak analiz edilip KNO hesaplandı. Bulgular: KNO, AA modu kullanılmadan (ortalama: 3,36) ve AA modu kullanılarak (ortalama:3,61) en yüksek kompomer (Glassiosite) görüntülerinde; AA modu kullanılmadan (ortalama: 0,21) ve AA modu kullanılarak (ortalama:0,23) en düşük amalgam (Tytin) görüntülerinde hesaplandı (p≤0.05). KNO ölçümleri AA modu kullanıldığında artış gösterdi. (p≤0.05). Sonuç: AA modu KIBT görüntülerinde dental materyallerden kaynaklanan artefaktları azaltmada etkilidir ve AA modunu kullanmak doğru tanı için gereklidir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi; kontrast noise oranı; dental materyal; artefakt; imaj kalitesi
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Scarfe WC, Li Z, Aboelmaaty W, Scott SA, Farman AG. Maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography: essence, elements and steps to interpretation. Aust Dent J 2012;57(Suppl 1):46-60. [CrossRef]
- 2. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am 2008;52(4):707-30. [CrossRef]
- 3. Pauwels R, Silkosessak O, Jacobs R, Bogaerts R, Bosmans H, Panmekiate S. A pragmatic approach to determine the optimal kVp in cone beam CT: balancing contrast-to-noise ratio and radiation dose. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014;43(5):20140059. [CrossRef]
- 4. 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(3):143-50.
- 5. Kim MS, Kim BY, Choi HY, Choi YJ, Oh SH, Kang JH, et al. Intravenous contrast media application using cone-beam computed tomography in a rabbit model. Imaging Sci Dent 2015;45(1):31-9. [CrossRef]
- 6. Queiroz PM, Oliveira ML, Groppo FC, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas DQ. Evaluation of metal artefact reduction in cone-beam computed tomography images of different dental materials. Clin Oral Investig 2018;22(1):419-23. [CrossRef]
- 7. Taylor C. Evaluation of the effects of positioning and configuration on contrast-to-noise ratio in the quality control of a 3D Accuitomo 170 dental CBCT system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016;45(5):20150430. [CrossRef]
- 8. Cebe F, Aktan AM, Ozsevik AS, Ciftci ME, Surmelioglu HD. The effects of different restorative materials on the detection of approximal caries in cone-beam computed tomography scans with and without metal artifact reduction mode. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017;123(3):392-400. [CrossRef ]
- 9. Demirturk Kocasarac H, Helvacioglu Yigit D, Bechara B, Sinanoglu A, Noujeim M. Contrast-to-noise ratio with different settings in a CBCT machine in presence of different root-end filling materials: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016;45(5):20160012. [CrossRef]
- 10. Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics 2004;24(6):1679-91. [CrossRef]
- 11. Wang L, D'Alpino PH, Lopes LG, Pereira JC. Mechanical properties of dental restorative materials: relative contribution of laboratory tests. J Appl Oral Sci 2003;11(3):162-7. [CrossRef]
- 12. Bechara B, Alex McMahan C, Moore WS, Noujeim M, Teixeira FB, Geha H. Cone beam CT scans with and without artefact reduction in root fracture detection of endodontically treated teeth. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013;42(5):20120245. [CrossRef]
- 13. Kuusisto N, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV, Huumonen S. Evaluation of intensity of artefacts in CBCT by radio-opacity of composite simulation models of implants in vitro. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015;44(2):20120245. [CrossRef]
- 14. Hwang JJ, Park H, Jeong HG, Han SS. Change in Image Quality According to the 3D Locations of a CBCT Phantom. PLoS One 2016;11(4):0153884. [CrossRef]
- 15. Kalender WA, Deak P, Kellermeier M, van Straten M, Vollmar SV. Application- and patient size-dependent optimization of x-ray spectra for CT. Med Phys 2009;36(3):993-1007. [CrossRef]
- 16. Bechara B, McMahan CA, Moore WS, Noujeim M, Geha H, Teixeira FB. Contrast-to-noise ratio difference in small field of view cone beam computed tomography machines. J Oral Sci 2012;54(3):227-32. [CrossRef]
- 17. Bechara B, McMahan CA, Geha H, Noujeim M. Evaluation of a cone beam CT artefact reduction algorithm. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012;41(5):422-8. [CrossRef]
- 18. Kamburoglu K, Kolsuz E, Murat S, Eren H, Yuksel S, Paksoy CS. Assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant and periodontal defects using a cone beam CT system with and without the application of metal artefact reduction mode. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013;42(8):20130176. [CrossRef]
- 19. Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, Syriopoulos K, van der Stelt P. Assessment of metal artefact reduction around dental titanium implants in cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014;43(7):20140019. [CrossRef]
- 20. Pauwels R, Seynaeve L, Bosmans H, Bogaerts R, Jacobs R. Technical versus diagnostic image quality in dental CBCT imaging. 2013.
| APA | BAYRAK S, KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E, KAMALAK H (2020). Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. , 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| Chicago | BAYRAK Seval,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK Emine Şebnem,KAMALAK HAKAN Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. (2020): 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| MLA | BAYRAK Seval,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK Emine Şebnem,KAMALAK HAKAN Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. , 2020, ss.36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| AMA | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. . 2020; 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| Vancouver | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. . 2020; 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| IEEE | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H "Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study." , ss.36 - 41, 2020. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| ISNAD | BAYRAK, Seval vd. "Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study". (2020), 36-41. https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| APA | BAYRAK S, KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E, KAMALAK H (2020). Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. European oral research (Online), 54(1), 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| Chicago | BAYRAK Seval,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK Emine Şebnem,KAMALAK HAKAN Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. European oral research (Online) 54, no.1 (2020): 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| MLA | BAYRAK Seval,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK Emine Şebnem,KAMALAK HAKAN Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. European oral research (Online), vol.54, no.1, 2020, ss.36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| AMA | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. European oral research (Online). 2020; 54(1): 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| Vancouver | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study. European oral research (Online). 2020; 54(1): 36 - 41. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| IEEE | BAYRAK S,KURŞUN ÇAKMAK E,KAMALAK H "Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study." European oral research (Online), 54, ss.36 - 41, 2020. 10.26650/eor.20200079 |
| ISNAD | BAYRAK, Seval vd. "Contrast-to-noise ratios of different dental restorative materials: An in-vitro cone beam computed tomography study". European oral research (Online) 54/1 (2020), 36-41. https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20200079 |
