Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis

Warangkana Weerawanich, Mayumi Shimizu, Yohei Takeshita, Kazutoshi Okamura, Shoko Yoshida, Gainer R. Jasa, Kazunori Yoshiura

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To determine the optimum cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters for specific diagnostic tasks. Methods: A Teflon phantom attached to a half-mandible in a large container was scanned in dental (D), implant (I), and panoramic (P) modes. An identical phantom in a small container was scanned in D mode. Both were scanned at 60, 80, 100, and 120 kV. We evaluated the image quality of five anatomical structures [dentinoenamel junction (1), lamina dura and periodontal ligament space (2), trabecular pattern (3), cortex–spongy bone junction (4), and pulp chamber and root canal (5)] and analyzed the diagnostic image quality with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. We then evaluated correlations between the two image qualities and calculated the threshold of acceptable diagnostic image quality. Optimum exposure parameters were determined from images with acceptable diagnostic image quality. Results: For the small container, the optimum exposure parameters were D mode, 80 kV for (1), (3), and (4) and D mode, 100 kV for (5). For the large container, they were D mode, 120 kV for (1), (3), and (5) and D mode, 100 kV for (4). I mode, 120 kV reached the acceptable level for (4). No images reached the acceptable level for (2). Conclusions: No optimum exposure parameters were identified for the evaluation of the lamina dura and periodontal ligament space. D mode was sufficient for the other structures; however, the tube voltage required for each structure differed. Smaller patients required lower tube voltage. I mode, 120 kV may be used for larger lesions.

Original languageEnglish
JournalOral Radiology
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Dental Pulp Cavity
Jaw
Noise
Periodontal Ligament
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Dental Implants
Polytetrafluoroethylene
Mandible
Bone and Bones

Keywords

  • Anatomic landmarks
  • Computer-assisted radiographic image interpretation
  • Cone-beam computed tomography
  • Imaging phantoms
  • Visual perception

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry (miscellaneous)
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. / Weerawanich, Warangkana; Shimizu, Mayumi; Takeshita, Yohei; Okamura, Kazutoshi; Yoshida, Shoko; Jasa, Gainer R.; Yoshiura, Kazunori.

In: Oral Radiology, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Weerawanich, Warangkana ; Shimizu, Mayumi ; Takeshita, Yohei ; Okamura, Kazutoshi ; Yoshida, Shoko ; Jasa, Gainer R. ; Yoshiura, Kazunori. / Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. In: Oral Radiology. 2018.
@article{2ceec89e14a545f2926d9880d16294c0,
title = "Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis",
abstract = "Objective: To determine the optimum cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters for specific diagnostic tasks. Methods: A Teflon phantom attached to a half-mandible in a large container was scanned in dental (D), implant (I), and panoramic (P) modes. An identical phantom in a small container was scanned in D mode. Both were scanned at 60, 80, 100, and 120 kV. We evaluated the image quality of five anatomical structures [dentinoenamel junction (1), lamina dura and periodontal ligament space (2), trabecular pattern (3), cortex–spongy bone junction (4), and pulp chamber and root canal (5)] and analyzed the diagnostic image quality with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. We then evaluated correlations between the two image qualities and calculated the threshold of acceptable diagnostic image quality. Optimum exposure parameters were determined from images with acceptable diagnostic image quality. Results: For the small container, the optimum exposure parameters were D mode, 80 kV for (1), (3), and (4) and D mode, 100 kV for (5). For the large container, they were D mode, 120 kV for (1), (3), and (5) and D mode, 100 kV for (4). I mode, 120 kV reached the acceptable level for (4). No images reached the acceptable level for (2). Conclusions: No optimum exposure parameters were identified for the evaluation of the lamina dura and periodontal ligament space. D mode was sufficient for the other structures; however, the tube voltage required for each structure differed. Smaller patients required lower tube voltage. I mode, 120 kV may be used for larger lesions.",
keywords = "Anatomic landmarks, Computer-assisted radiographic image interpretation, Cone-beam computed tomography, Imaging phantoms, Visual perception",
author = "Warangkana Weerawanich and Mayumi Shimizu and Yohei Takeshita and Kazutoshi Okamura and Shoko Yoshida and Jasa, {Gainer R.} and Kazunori Yoshiura",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11282-018-0348-6",
language = "English",
journal = "Oral Radiology",
issn = "0911-6028",
publisher = "Springer Japan",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Determination of optimum exposure parameters for dentoalveolar structures of the jaws using the CB MercuRay system with cluster signal-to-noise analysis

AU - Weerawanich, Warangkana

AU - Shimizu, Mayumi

AU - Takeshita, Yohei

AU - Okamura, Kazutoshi

AU - Yoshida, Shoko

AU - Jasa, Gainer R.

AU - Yoshiura, Kazunori

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Objective: To determine the optimum cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters for specific diagnostic tasks. Methods: A Teflon phantom attached to a half-mandible in a large container was scanned in dental (D), implant (I), and panoramic (P) modes. An identical phantom in a small container was scanned in D mode. Both were scanned at 60, 80, 100, and 120 kV. We evaluated the image quality of five anatomical structures [dentinoenamel junction (1), lamina dura and periodontal ligament space (2), trabecular pattern (3), cortex–spongy bone junction (4), and pulp chamber and root canal (5)] and analyzed the diagnostic image quality with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. We then evaluated correlations between the two image qualities and calculated the threshold of acceptable diagnostic image quality. Optimum exposure parameters were determined from images with acceptable diagnostic image quality. Results: For the small container, the optimum exposure parameters were D mode, 80 kV for (1), (3), and (4) and D mode, 100 kV for (5). For the large container, they were D mode, 120 kV for (1), (3), and (5) and D mode, 100 kV for (4). I mode, 120 kV reached the acceptable level for (4). No images reached the acceptable level for (2). Conclusions: No optimum exposure parameters were identified for the evaluation of the lamina dura and periodontal ligament space. D mode was sufficient for the other structures; however, the tube voltage required for each structure differed. Smaller patients required lower tube voltage. I mode, 120 kV may be used for larger lesions.

AB - Objective: To determine the optimum cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters for specific diagnostic tasks. Methods: A Teflon phantom attached to a half-mandible in a large container was scanned in dental (D), implant (I), and panoramic (P) modes. An identical phantom in a small container was scanned in D mode. Both were scanned at 60, 80, 100, and 120 kV. We evaluated the image quality of five anatomical structures [dentinoenamel junction (1), lamina dura and periodontal ligament space (2), trabecular pattern (3), cortex–spongy bone junction (4), and pulp chamber and root canal (5)] and analyzed the diagnostic image quality with cluster signal-to-noise analysis. We then evaluated correlations between the two image qualities and calculated the threshold of acceptable diagnostic image quality. Optimum exposure parameters were determined from images with acceptable diagnostic image quality. Results: For the small container, the optimum exposure parameters were D mode, 80 kV for (1), (3), and (4) and D mode, 100 kV for (5). For the large container, they were D mode, 120 kV for (1), (3), and (5) and D mode, 100 kV for (4). I mode, 120 kV reached the acceptable level for (4). No images reached the acceptable level for (2). Conclusions: No optimum exposure parameters were identified for the evaluation of the lamina dura and periodontal ligament space. D mode was sufficient for the other structures; however, the tube voltage required for each structure differed. Smaller patients required lower tube voltage. I mode, 120 kV may be used for larger lesions.

KW - Anatomic landmarks

KW - Computer-assisted radiographic image interpretation

KW - Cone-beam computed tomography

KW - Imaging phantoms

KW - Visual perception

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053552070&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053552070&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11282-018-0348-6

DO - 10.1007/s11282-018-0348-6

M3 - Article

C2 - 30484205

AN - SCOPUS:85053552070

JO - Oral Radiology

JF - Oral Radiology

SN - 0911-6028

ER -