Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of Voxel Size Variation on CBCT-Based Diagnostic Outcome in Dentistry: a Systematic Review

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to make a systematic review on the impact of voxel size in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based image acquisition, retrieving evidence regarding the diagnostic outcome of those images. The MEDLINE bibliographic database was searched from 1950 to June 2012 for reports comparing diverse CBCT voxel sizes. The search strategy was limited to English-language publications using the following combined terms in the search strategy: (voxel or FOV or field of view or resolution) and (CBCT or cone beam CT). The results from the review identified 20 publications that qualitatively or quantitatively assessed the influence of voxel size on CBCT-based diagnostic outcome, and in which the methodology/results comprised at least one of the expected parameters (image acquisition, reconstruction protocols, type of diagnostic task, and presence of a gold standard). The diagnostic task assessed in the studies was diverse, including the detection of root fractures, the detection of caries lesions, and accuracy of 3D surface reconstruction and of bony measurements, among others. From the studies assessed, it is clear that no general protocol can be yet defined for CBCT examination of specific diagnostic tasks in dentistry. Rationale in this direction is an important step to define the utility of CBCT imaging.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Qu X, Li G, Zhang Z, Ma X: Detection accuracy of in vitro approximal caries by cone beam computed tomography images. Eur J Radiol 79:24–27, 2011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Levin MD, Gane D: Essentials of maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography. Alpha Omegan 103:62–67, 2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Scarfe WC, Farman AG: What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am 52:707–730, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Grauer D, Cevidanes LS, Proffit WR: Working with DICOM craniofacial images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136:460–470, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tsiklakis K, Donta C, Gavala S, Karayianni K, Kamenopoulou V, Hourdakis CJ: Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose cone beam CT. Eur J Radiol 56:413–417, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. White SC, Pharoah MJ: The evolution and application of dental maxillofacial imaging modalities. Dent Clin North Am 52:689–705, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Kolsuz E, Kurt H, Yuksel S, Paksoy C: Comparative assessment of subjective image quality of cross-sectional cone-beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Sci 53:501–508, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hatcher DC: Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. J Am Dent Assoc 141:3–6, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  9. Palomo JM, Rao PS, Hans MG: Influence of CBCT exposure conditions on radiation dose. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 105:773–782, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Davies J, Johnson B, Drage N: Effective doses from cone beam CT investigation of the jaws. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 41:30–36, 2012

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Patcas R, Muller L, Ullrich O, Peltomaki T: Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 141:41–50, 2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Anderson SW, Soto JA: Multi-detector row CT of acute non-traumatic abdominal pain: contrast and protocol considerations. Radiol Clin North Am 50:137–147, 2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Miles KA: Perfusion CT for the assessment of tumour vascularity: which protocol. Br J Radiol 76:36–42, 2003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Neves FS, Vasconcelos TV, Vaz SL, Freitas DQ, Haiter-Neto F: Evaluation of reconstructed images with different voxel sizes of acquisition in the diagnosis of simulated external root resorption using cone beam computed tomography. Int Endod J 45:234–239, 2012

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hassan B, Couto Souza P, Jacobs R, de Azambuja Berti S, van der Stelt P: 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 14:303–310, 2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Waltrick KB, de Abreu Junior MJ, Correa M, Zastrow MD, D'Avila Dutra V: Accuracy of linear measurements and visibility of the mandibular canal on cone-beam computed tomography images with different voxel sizes: an in vitro study. J Periodontol, 2012, doi:10.1902/jop.2012.110524

  17. Damstra J, Fourie Z, Huddleston Slater JJ, Ren Y: Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomography-derived surface models of different voxel sizes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:16–17, 2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. da Silveira PF, Vizzotto MB, Liedke GS, da Silveira HL, Montagner F, da Silveira HE: Detection of vertical root fractures by conventional radiographic examination and cone beam computed tomography—an in vitro analysis. Dent Traumatol, 2012, doi:10.1111/j.1600-9657.2012.01126.x

  19. Melo SL, Bortoluzzi EA, Abreu Jr, M, Correa LR, Correa M: Diagnostic ability of a cone-beam computed tomography scan to assess longitudinal root fractures in prosthetically treated teeth. J Endod 36:1879–1882, 2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ozer SY: Detection of vertical root fractures by using cone beam computed tomography with variable voxel sizes in an in vitro model. J Endod 37:75–79, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wenzel A, Haiter-Neto F, Frydenberg M, Kirkevang LL: Variable-resolution cone-beam computerized tomography with enhancement filtration compared with intraoral photostimulable phosphor radiography in detection of transverse root fractures in an in vitro model. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 108:939–945, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dalili Z, Taramsari M, Mousavi Mehr SZ, Salamat F: Diagnostic value of two modes of cone-beam computed tomography in evaluation of simulated external root resorption: an in vitro study. Imaging Sci Dent 42:19–24, 2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kamburoglu K, Kursun S: A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT images of different voxel resolutions used to detect simulated small internal resorption cavities. Int Endod J 43:798–807, 2010

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Liedke GS, da Silveira HE, da Silveira HL, Dutra V, de Figueiredo JA: Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to evaluate simulated external root resorption. J Endod 35:233–235, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cheng JG, Zhang ZL, Wang XY, Zhang ZY, Ma XC, Li G: Detection accuracy of proximal caries by phosphor plate and cone-beam computerized tomography images scanned with different resolutions. Clin Oral Investig 16:1015–1021, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Haiter-Neto F, Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E: Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography scans compared with intraoral image modalities for detection of caries lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:18–22, 2008

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Yuksel SP, Cebeci AR, Paksoy CS: Occlusal caries detection by using a cone-beam CT with different voxel resolutions and a digital intraoral sensor. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 109:63–69, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  28. Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM: Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 140:25–30, 2011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bauman R, Scarfe W, Clark S, Morelli J, Scheetz J, Farman A: Ex vivo detection of mesiobuccal canals in maxillary molars using CBCT at four different isotropic voxel dimensions. Int Endod J 44:752–758, 2011

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Al-Rawi B, Hassan B, Vandenberge B, Jacobs R: Accuracy assessment of three-dimensional surface reconstructions of teeth from cone beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Rehabil 37:352–358, 2010

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Maret D, et al: Effect of voxel size on accuracy of 3D reconstructions with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 41:649–655, 2012

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sun Z, Smith T, Kortam S, Kim DG, Tee BC, Fields H: Effect of bone thickness on alveolar bone-height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139:117–127, 2011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Torres MG, Campos PS, Segundo NP, Navarro M, Crusoe-Rebello I: Accuracy of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes. Implant Dent 21:150–155, 2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fourie Z, Damstra J, Gerrits PO, Ren Y: Accuracy and reliability of facial soft tissue depth measurements using cone beam computer tomography. Forensic Sci Int 199:9–14, 2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sherrard JF, Rossouw PE, Benson BW, Carrillo R, Buschang PH: Accuracy and reliability of tooth and root lengths measured on cone-beam computed tomographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:100–108, 2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yeni YN, Christopherson GT, Dong XN, Kim DG, Fyhrie DP: Effect of microcomputed tomography voxel size on the finite element model accuracy for human cancellous bone. J Biomech Eng 127:1–8, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Chadwick JW, Lam EW: The effects of slice thickness and interslice interval on reconstructed cone beam computed tomographic images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 110:e37–e42, 2010

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Spin-Neto R, Marcantonio Jr, E, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A: Exploring CBCT-based DICOM files. A systematic review on the properties of images used to evaluate maxillofacial bone grafts. J Digit Imaging 24:959–966, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB: Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: Cb Mercuray, Newtom 3G and i-Cat. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:219–226, 2006

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Ballrick JW, Palomo JM, Ruch E, Amberman BD, Hans MG: Image distortion and spatial resolution of a commercially available cone-beam computed tomography machine. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 134:573–582, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Leung CC, Palomo L, Griffith R, Hans MG: Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for measuring alveolar bone height and detecting bony dehiscences and fenestrations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 137:109–119, 2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Thomas RZ, Ruben JL, de Vries J, ten Bosch JJ, Huysmans MC: Transversal wavelength-independent microradiography, a method for monitoring caries lesions over time, validated with transversal microradiography. Caries Res 40:281–291, 2006

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hassan B, Metska ME, Ozok AR, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR: Detection of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth by a cone beam computed tomography scan. J Endod 35:719–722, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Farman AG: ALARA still applies. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 100:395–397, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hirsch E, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Silva MA: Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:268–273, 2008

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dentistry—Oral Radiology Health, Aarhus University, Vennelyst Boulevard 9, Aarhus C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark

    Rubens Spin-Neto, Erik Gotfredsen & Ann Wenzel

Authors
  1. Rubens Spin-Neto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik Gotfredsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ann Wenzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rubens Spin-Neto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spin-Neto, R., Gotfredsen, E. & Wenzel, A. Impact of Voxel Size Variation on CBCT-Based Diagnostic Outcome in Dentistry: a Systematic Review. J Digit Imaging 26, 813–820 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-012-9562-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-012-9562-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation