Indications of cone beam CT in head and neck imaging in children

Walliczek-Dworschak, U.; Diogo, Isabell; Strack, Larry; Mandapathil, Magis; Teymoortash, Afshin; Werner, Jochen A.; Güldner, Christian

doi:10.14639/0392-100x-1219

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most patients were above 13 years of age, which is consistent with our results. It was thought that this was because clinicians requested CBCT more frequently because children are more vulnerable to ionizing radiation than adults, 7 and children in this age group show better cooperation with CBCT. Furthermore, the fact that impacted tooth, which is the most common reason for CBCT requests, is encountered more frequently in this age group explains this situation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 Since the tissue cells of children show a faster rate of division during growth, children are 2-10 times more vulnerable to ionizing radiation than adults. The risk of the stochastic effect of the radiation is higher, 6,7 making the use of CBCT in paediatric dentistry controversial. 2 Therefore, the dose should be adjusted according to the age and the body weight of the child.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of use of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric patients: A cross‐sectional study

YİĞİT

Yüksel

Evirgen

et al. 2023

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used in paediatric dentistry. Appropriate use of CBCT is important because children are more vulnerable to ionizing radiation than adults.AimTo investigate the use of CBCT in children by describing reasons for requesting it and its distribution according to age, oral region, and department.DesignCone beam computed tomography scans of patients (age < 19 years) who presented to our dental clinic were investigated retrospectively according to sex, age (6–12 [Group 1] and 13–18 [Group 2] years based on dentition), referring department, imaging area (anterior/posterior, mandible/maxilla), and indication. Indications were grouped under five headings according to 2011 SEDENTEXCT guidelines: dental anomalies, impacted teeth, endodontics, bone pathosis, and others.ResultsOverall, 334 CBCT scans at different times and for different reasons in 319 patients were evaluated. In recent years, CBCT requests increased in both age groups. Eighty‐five CBCT scans (25.44%) of 78 patients (24.45%) with a mean age of 10.37 ± 1.60 years were examined in Group 1, whereas 249 CBCT scans (%74.55) of 241 patients (75.54%) with a mean age of 15.66 ± 1.70 years were examined in Group 2. The most frequent indication was the assessment of impacted teeth (46.1%). The anterior maxilla was the most frequently monitored region (41.6%). The oral and maxillofacial radiology department was the department that made the most CBCT requests in all the years considered (53.6%).ConclusionsThe most common indications were the assessment of dentigerous cysts and impacted teeth. There was an increase in the number of referrals to paediatric dentistry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of use of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric patients: A cross‐sectional study

YİĞİT

Yüksel

Evirgen

et al. 2023

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is obvious that radiation doses administered to patients are determined not only by exposure parameters but also by FOV in CT and CBCT. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] It is fundamental to educate both dental practitioners and patients about the use of this progressive technology with its little consequence on general well being.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation safety standards during 3D CBCT imaging: A review in dentistry

Bhateja¹,

Thamman

Jasmine³

et al. 2023

JDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) technology altered the practise of oral and maxillofacial radiology. When compared to medical computed tomography, CBCT was quickly adopted in dentistry settings due to its small size, relatively reduced cost, and decreased ionising radiation exposure. CBCT referrals are still being made incorrectly due to a lack of sufficient education among dentists and specialists. Furthermore, in order to get high-quality pictures, operators may raise the radiation dose, exposing the patient to unnecessary hazards. The objective of this review is to give an insight into 3D imaging with CBCT technology and a prudent radiation monitoring during CBCT for the benefit of both patients and dentists.

show abstract

“…Another effective way to reduce the applied dose is to reduce the rotation angle [ 17 ]. Cone beam CT with lower radiation in comparison to CT could therefore be of great advantage in children [ 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro measurements of radiation exposure with different modalities (computed tomography, cone beam computed tomography) for imaging the petrous bone with a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Various imaging modalities, such as multi-detector computed tomography (CT) and cone beam CT are commonly used in infants for the diagnosis of hearing loss and surgical planning of implantation hearing aid devices, with differing results. Objective We compared three different imaging modalities available in our institution, including a high-class CT scanner, a mid-class CT scanner and an angiography system with a cone beam CT option, for image quality and radiation exposure in a phantom study. Materials and methods While scanning an anthropomorphic phantom imitating a 1-year-old child with vendor-provided routine protocols, organ doses, surface doses and effective doses were determined for these three modalities with thermoluminescent dosimeters. The image quality was evaluated using the signal difference to noise ratio (SDNR) and the spatial resolution of a line-pair insert in the phantom head. The dose efficiency, defined as the ratio of SDNR and effective dose, was also compared. Results The organ and surface doses were lowest with the high-class CT protocol, but the image quality was the worst. Image quality was best with the cone beam CT protocol, which, however, had the highest radiation exposure in this study, whereas the mid-class CT was in between. Conclusion Based on our results, high-end CT should be used for surgical planning because it has the lowest dose, while the image quality is still sufficient for this purpose. However, if highest image quality is needed and required, e.g., by ENT surgeons, the other modalities should be considered.

show abstract

Indications of cone beam CT in head and neck imaging in children

Cited by 13 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of use of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric patients: A cross‐sectional study

Evaluation of use of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric patients: A cross‐sectional study

Radiation safety standards during 3D CBCT imaging: A review in dentistry

In vitro measurements of radiation exposure with different modalities (computed tomography, cone beam computed tomography) for imaging the petrous bone with a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About