Accuracy assessment of prototypes produced using multi-slice and cone-beam computed tomography

Primo, Bruno Tochetto; Presotto, A.C.; Oliveira, Helena Willhelm de; Gassen, Humberto Thomazi; Miguens, Sérgio Augusto Quevedo; Silva, A.N.; Hernandez, Pedro Antônio González

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.04.013

Cited by 29 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These two factors may possibly have limited the visualization of erosive changes in the former study to only gross or marked erosions. [16][17][18][19][20] Therefore, it is conceivable that the differences in the results of the study by Cevidanes et al 5 and those of the present study may also be influenced by the fact that only marked changes were visible in their images, whereas small detailed findings were detected in the sectional images in the present study. It is also conceivable that differences in the results may be caused by use of different CBCT devices.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

Comparative study of the prevalence of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritic changes in cone beam computed tomograms of patients with or without temporomandibular disorder

Al-Ekrish

Al-Juhani

Alhaidari

et al. 2015

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

Comparative study of the prevalence of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritic changes in cone beam computed tomograms of patients with or without temporomandibular disorder

Al-Ekrish

Al-Juhani

Alhaidari

et al. 2015

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…20 Our results are in line with these and are comparable to other investigations of the dimensional accuracy of CAD models produced from either CT or CBCT scans. [21][22][23] Although micro-CT produces high-resolution 3D images and an unprecedented level of accuracy among radiographic imaging techniques, the radiation doses are in the region of 1-15 centigray (cGy), 24 and as such the technique is only suitable for exvivo investigations. CBCT scans were therefore used of subjects with UCLP recruited from a bone grafting clinic at a cleft center and are a good representation of patients requiring ABG surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of both virtual and printed 3-dimensional models for volumetric measurement of alveolar clefts before grafting with alveolar bone compared with a validated algorithm: a preliminary investigation

Kasaven

McIntyre

Mossey

2017

British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accuracy of both virtual and printed 3-dimensional models for volumetric measurement of alveolar clefts prior to alveolar bone grafting compared to a validated algorithm Kasaven, C. P.; McIntyre, Grant; Mossey, Peter General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain.• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Results: Inter-observer reliability was almost perfect (ICC = 0.987). There were no significant differences between the three methods (p>0.05) although virtual 3D models were the most precise with the smallest standard deviations and confidence intervals.Conclusion: In this preliminary investigation, virtual 3D and 3D printed models were as precise as the validated computer algorithm for calculating alveolar cleft volumes prior to bone grafting but virtual 3D models were the most accurate and subject to further investigation could be a useful adjunct in clinical practice.

show abstract

“…9, 13 Although some authors have stated that high-resolution images (voxel size smaller than 0.2 mm) provide significantly more accurate diagnosis, 14–20 others did not find differences among voxel sizes ranging from 0.125 to 0.4 mm for most clinical purposes. 21–28 It has been shown that a 0.3 mm voxel size associates good diagnostic performance with lower X-ray exposure. 29–31 However, further clinical studies are needed to better understand specific protocols for different diagnostic tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone beam computed tomography-based models versus multislice spiral computed tomography-based models for assessing condylar morphology

Gomes

Gomes²,

Gonçalves

et al. 2016

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To quantitatively compare condylar morphology using CBCT and MSCT virtual 3D surface models. Study Design The sample consisted of secondary data analysis of CBCT and MSCT scans obtained for clinical purposes from 74 patients treated with condylar resection and prosthetic joint replacement. 3D surface models of 146 condyles were constructed from each scan modality. Across-subject models were approximated and voxel-based registration was performed between homologous CBCT and MSCT images, making it possible to create an average CBCT and MSCT-based condylar models. SPHARM-PDM provided matching points on each correspondent model. ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA assessed statistical significant differences between observers and imaging modalities. One-sample t-test evaluated the null hypothesis that the mean differences between each CBCT and MSCT-based model were not clinically significant (<0.5mm). Tests were conducted at a significance level of P<0.05. Results ShapeAnalysisMANCOVA showed no statistically significant difference between the average CBCT and MSCT-based models (P>0.68). During pairwise comparison, the mean difference observed was 0.406mm, SD 0.173. One sample t-test showed that mean differences between each paired CBCT and MSCT-based models were not clinically significant (P=0.411). Conclusion 3D surface models constructed from CBCT images are comparable to those derived from MSCT scans and may be considered reliable tools for assessing condylar morphology.

show abstract

Accuracy assessment of prototypes produced using multi-slice and cone-beam computed tomography

Cited by 29 publications

References 22 publications

Comparative study of the prevalence of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritic changes in cone beam computed tomograms of patients with or without temporomandibular disorder

Comparative study of the prevalence of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritic changes in cone beam computed tomograms of patients with or without temporomandibular disorder

Accuracy of both virtual and printed 3-dimensional models for volumetric measurement of alveolar clefts before grafting with alveolar bone compared with a validated algorithm: a preliminary investigation

Cone beam computed tomography-based models versus multislice spiral computed tomography-based models for assessing condylar morphology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About