Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A phantom for testing Cone Beam CTs

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) scanners are becoming more common for dental and maxillofacial/head scanning, but performing image quality tests on these systems is difficult. There are quality assurance (QA) phantoms commercially available but they can be expensive, bulky and not optimised for CBCT imaging limits. Smaller phantoms often lack features that are recommended for testing CBCT systems. A custom made phantom can provide more useful test objects in a more convenient size and at a lower cost. The proposed phantom is called the “Karu” Cone Beam CT Phantom and is constructed with a 3D printed poly lactic acid (PLA) shell, with 3D printed inserts for holding the test details in place. Tests included are geometric accuracy (in three dimensions), Hounsfield Unit (HU) accuracy, low contrast detectability, spatial resolution (using line pairs), and uniformity/artifacts/noise. The phantom was scanned on a number of scanners and was clearly able to differentiate scanners producing poorer quality images from better quality ones. The phantom could be produced for under NZ $2000.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Availability of data and material

Author can provide raw data if required.

Code availability (software application or custom code)

Not applicable.

References

  1. SEDENTEXCT (2012) European Commission Radiation Protection N° 172, Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology (Evidence-based guidelines). https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/172.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  2. EFOMP, ESTRO and IAEA (2019) Quality control in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) EFOMP-ESTRO-IAEA protocol. https://www.efomp.org/uploads/2d23d153-b77c-4161-802c-5b8422d15e29/EFOMP_IAEA_ESTRO_%20CBCT_2019_05_27.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  3. PhantomLab (2020) Catphan Phantoms. https://www.phantomlab.com/catphan-phantoms. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  4. Sun Nuclear (2020) CT ACR 464 Phantom. https://www.sunnuclear.com/products/ct-acr-464-phantom. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  5. Leeds Test Objects (2020) SedentexCT IQ. https://www.leedstestobjects.com/index.php/phantom/sedentexct-iq-phantom. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  6. Pro-Project (2020) Pro-Dent CT mk II. http://pro-project.pl/pro-dent_ct_mk_ii_en. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  7. Pro-Project (2020) Pro-Dent CT MINI. http://pro-project.pl/pro-dent_ct_mini_en. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  8. PhantomLabs (2020) Corgi Phantom. https://www.phantomlab.com/corgi. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  9. Shelley Medical Imaging Technologies (2018) Micro CT Phantoms. http://www.simutec.com/Products/microphantoms.html. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  10. Leeds Test Objects (2020) CBCT-161-Mini. https://www.leedstestobjects.com/index.php/phantom/cbct-161-mini. Accessed 10 Aug 2020

  11. de Oliveira M, Wenzel A, Campos P, Spin-Neto R (2017) Quality assurance phantoms for cone beam computed tomography: a systematic literature review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 46. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160329

  12. Ozaki Y, Watanabe H, Nomura Y, Honda E, Sumi Y (2013) Location dependency of the spatial resolution of cone beam computed tomography for dental use. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 116(5):648–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.07.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pauwels R, Jacobs R, Singer S, Mupparapu M (2015) CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable? Dentomaxillofac Radiol 44. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140238

  14. Nackaerts O, Maes F, Yan H, Couto Souza P, Pauwels R, Jacobs R (2011) Analysis of intensity variability in multislice and cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 22:873–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02076.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was required.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Physicist, Medical Physics and Bioengineering Department, Christchurch Hospital, Private Bag, Christchurch, 4710, New Zealand

    Steven Muir

  2. Medical Physicist, Photon Physics Ltd., Christchurch, New Zealand

    Johnny Laban

Authors
  1. Steven Muir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johnny Laban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Muir.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

No conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

No Ethics approval was required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Muir, S., Laban, J. A phantom for testing Cone Beam CTs. Phys Eng Sci Med 43, 1433–1440 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-020-00944-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-020-00944-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation