The growing concern of radiation dose in paediatric dental and maxillofacial CBCT: an easy guide for daily practice

Stratis, Andreas; Zhang, Guozhi; Jacobs, Reinhilde; Bogaerts, Ria; Bosmans, Hilde

doi:10.1007/s00330-019-06287-5

Cited by 43 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Accordingly, CBCT coupled with computerguided planning permits implant designs appropriate for a particular implant site, in terms of implant type (shape and surface structure), dimensions (length and diameter), and placement (entry point and angle) and also allows surgeons to decide the need for and type of bone augmentation (such as bone chip/split and sinus lift) for a particular edentulous region lacking sufficient amount of bone to support the implant. However, radiation dose with CBCT, especially for the thyroid, remains highly problematic, even though lower than that of conventional CT [4,5].…”

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It may indeed be hard to imagine that MR imaging with lower accessibility and spatial resolution compared with CBCT could supersede the latter in dental implant planning. However, radiation dose with CBCT, especially for younger generations, is a serious concern [5]. Furthermore, besides improving the accuracy, reliability, and usability of MR-based dental implant planning, MR-borne advantages over CBCT could also facilitate the clinical application of MR-based planning.…”

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dental MRI: a road beyond CBCT

Nakamura

2020

Eur Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging coupled with computer-guided surgery planning is the core of the contemporary dental implant practice. • Magnetic resonance (MR)-based dental implant planning can achieve results comparable to those with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based planning. • MR-based dental implant planning without radiation dose could be a potential alternative to CBCT-based planning.

show abstract

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental MRI: a road beyond CBCT

Nakamura

2020

Eur Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If unacceptable deviation occurs, it’s would be a difficult decision for the surgeon whether a corrective reentry is necessary. Another drawback of postoperative radiography is that the patient’s acceptability is often limited due to the growing concern on radiation hazard [ 4 ].…”

Section: Backgroundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental implant location via surface scanner: a pilot study

Zhou

et al. 2020

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Implant location is performed after placement to verify that the safety of neighboring anatomic structure and the realizability of prosthetic plan. Routine postoperative location is based on radiological scanning and raises the concerns on radiation exposure and inconveniency in practice. In the present study a location method based on surface scanning was introduced and the accuracy of this method was assessed in vitro. Material and methods A total of 40 implants were placed in 10 resin mandible models. The models were scanned with intraoral scanner (IS group) and extraoral scanner (ES group). The implant position was located with fusing the images of surface scanning and cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) after implant placement. Deviations were measured between positions located by surface scanner and postoperative CBCT with the parameters: central deviation at apex (cda), central deviation at hex (cdh), horizontal deviation at apex (hda), horizontal deviation at hex (hdh), vertical deviation at apex (vda), vertical deviation at hex (vdh) and angular deviation (ad). Results In IS group, the mean value of cda, cdh, hda, hdh, vda, vdh and ad was 0.27 mm, 0.23 mm, 0.12 mm, 0.10 mm, 0.21 mm, 0.19 mm and 0.72°, respectively. In ES group, the mean value of cda, cdh, hda, hdh, vda, vdh and ad was 0.28 mm, 0.25 mm 0.14 mm, 0.11 mm, 0.22 mm, 0.20 mm and 0.68°, respectively. The implant deviations in IS and ES groups were of no significant difference for any of the measurements. Conclusions Dental implant can be located via surface scanner with acceptable accuracy for postoperative verification. Further clinical investigation is needed to assess the feasibility of the method.

show abstract

“…43 Considering the benefits of this imaging modality for all of the purposes previously described, the next step is to establish optimization strategies for CBCT use and afterward select the appropriate CBCT unit and dedicated parameter setup for specific clinical applications. 13 From the available evidence it is clear that although a large number of CBCT units are available, only a few are suitable for particular tasks such as endodontic treatment. 12,15 Therefore, even when seeking a practice based on scientific evidence, the results of CBCT studies must be analyzed with caution.…”

Section: Optimizing Cbct Images and Future Possibilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effective doses can vary up to 100 times among CBCTunits, ranging from an equivalent panoramic dose to a multidetector computed tomography (CT) dose level. 13 Even when considering only one specific CBCT unit, differences on the acquisition protocol can lead to large variations of radiation dose levels (equivalent from 1 to 200 times a panoramic radiograph), diagnostic image quality, and 3D segmentation accuracy. 14,15 Those variable characteristics will yield indication-specific imaging for different CBCT machines, with several CBCTunits unable to provide a detailed diagnosis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dentomaxillofacial CBCT: Clinical Challenges for Indication-oriented Imaging

Wanderley

Vasconcelos

Leite

et al. 2020

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This critical review discusses the clinical challenges for patient-specific and indication-oriented dentomaxillofacial cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Large variations among units and protocols may lead to variable degrees of diagnostic and three-dimensional model accuracy, impacting both specific diagnostic tasks and treatment planning. Particular indications, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, may give rise to very specific challenges with regard to CBCT unit and parameter setup, considering the required image quality, segmentation accuracy, and artifact level. Considering that dental materials are in the field of view needed for diagnosis or treatment planning, artifact expression is a dominant factor in proper CBCT selection. The heterogeneity of dental CBCT units and performances may highly impact the scientific results. Thus research findings cannot be simply generalized as published evidence, and a demonstrated clinical applicability for a specific indication should not be simply extrapolated from one CBCT unit to another.

show abstract

The growing concern of radiation dose in paediatric dental and maxillofacial CBCT: an easy guide for daily practice

Cited by 43 publications

References 27 publications

Dental MRI: a road beyond CBCT

Dental MRI: a road beyond CBCT

Dental implant location via surface scanner: a pilot study

Dentomaxillofacial CBCT: Clinical Challenges for Indication-oriented Imaging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About