GÖRÜNTÜLEME VERİLERİ İLE CBCT ENDİKASYONLARI ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN RETROSPEKTİF OLARAK DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ
Abstract
Amaç: Avrupa Dental ve Maksillofasiyal Radyoloji Akademisi, konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) kullanımının temel ilkelerini belirlemek için 2009 yılında SEDENTEXCT projesini uygulamış ve uzmanlıklar için ayrıntılı temel kriterler oluşturmuştur. Bu ilkelerden biri, görüntüleme alanının doğru boyutlandırılmasının radyasyon dozu için kritik olduğunu belirtir. Bu çalışma, KIBT verilerini geriye dönük olarak analiz etmeyi ve farklı bölümlerdeki klinisyenler için belirlenen KIBT endikasyonlarını ve görüntülenen bölgenin büyüklüğünü (FOV) araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Toplam 8955 hastanın 2015-2019 yılları arasında elde edilen KIBT verileri geriye dönük olarak taranmıştır. Veriler, FOV, endikasyon, yaş ve cinsiyet gibi kriterlere göre değerlendirilmiştir. Kategorik değişkenler arasındaki değerlendirmelerde gruplar arasındaki farkı araştırmak için ki-kare testi kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: FOV değerleri ile istek nedenleri karşılaştırıldığında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmuştur (p=0,000). En yüksek FOV değeri 240 mm x 165 mm olan görüntüler çoğunlukla ortognatik cerrahi öncesi planlama için alınmıştır. Küçük alanlardaki apikal patolojiler ve odontojenik kistler için 50 mm x 50 mm olan en küçük FOV değerinin tercih edildiği görülmüştür.
Sonuç: Literatürdeki kılavuzlar izlenerek, ortognatik cerrahide gerektiği gibi daha geniş alanı kapsayan vakalarda en yüksek FOV’un kullanıldığı, en küçük FOV’un ise kök kanal morfolojisi ve apikal patolojilerin incelenmesi gibi endodontik nedenlerle sıklıkla kullanıldığı görülmüştür.
Supporting Institution
YOK
Project Number
YOK
Thanks
YOK
References
- 1. Yeung AWK, Jacobs R, Bornstein MM. Novel low-dose protocols using cone beam computed tomography in dental medicine: a review focusing on indications, limitations, and future possibilities. Clin Oral İnvest 2019;23(6):2573-81. google scholar
- 2. Mehta V, Ahmad N. Cone beamed computed tomography in pediatric dentistry: Concepts revisited. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2020;10(2):210-1. google scholar
- 3. Jain S, Choudhary K, Nagi R, Shukla S, Kaur N, Grover D. New evolution of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: Combining digital technologies. İmaging Sci Dent 2019;49(3):179-90. google scholar
- 4. Horner K, İslam M, Flygare L, Tsiklakis K, Whaites E. Basic principles for use of dental cone beam computed tomography: consensus guidelines of the European Academy of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009;38(4):187-95. google scholar
- 5. Pauwels R. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial imaging: dose matters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2015;165(1-4):156-61. google scholar
- 6. Rehani MM, Gupta R, Bartling S,GC Sharp, Pauwels R, Berris T, et al. Radiological Protection in Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). İCRP Publication 129. Ann İCRP 2015;44(1):9-127. google scholar
- 7. Schulze RK, Drage N. Cone-beam computed tomography and its applications in dental and maxillofacial radiology. Clin Radiol 2020;75(9):647-57. google scholar
- 8. Dula K, Bornstein MM, Buser D, Dagassan-Berndt D, Ettlin DA, Filippi A, et al. SADMFR guidelines for the use of cone-beam computed tomography/digital volume tomography. Swiss Dent J 2014;124(11):1169-83. google scholar
- 9. Energy D-Gf. Cone Beam CT For Dental And Maxillofacial Radiology (Evidence-Based Guidelines ) 2012 [Available from: https://www. sedentexct.eu/content/guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology. google scholar
- 10. Hajem S, Brogârdh-Roth S, Nilsson M, Hellen-Halme K. CBCT of Swedish children and adolescents at an oral and maxillofacial radiology department. A survey of requests and indications. Acta Odontol Scand 2020;78(1):38-44. google scholar
- 11. Hol C, Hellen-Halme K, Torgersen G, Nilsson M, M0ystad A. How do dentists use CBCT in dental clinics? A Norwegian nationwide survey. Acta Odontol Scand 2015;73(3):195-201. google scholar
- 12. Al-Okshi A, Theodorakou C, Lindh C. Dose optimization for assessment of periodontal structures in cone beam CT examinations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017;46(3):20160311. google scholar
- 13. de Melo LPL, Oenning ACC, Nadaes MR, Nejaim Y, Neves FS, Oliveira ML, et al. İnfluence of acquisition parameters on the evaluation of mandibular third molars through cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017;124(2):183-90. google scholar
- 14. Neves FS, de Camargo Souza T, de-Azevedo-Vaz SL, Campos PSF, Böscolo FN. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography milliamperage settings on image quality of the mandibular third molar region. Oral Radiol 2014;30(1):27-31. google scholar
ON THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN IMAGING DATA AND THE INDICATIONS OF CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
Abstract
Objective: The European Academy of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (EADMFR) implemented the Safety and Efficacy of a New and Emerging Dental X-ray Modality (SEDENTEXCT) Project in 2009 to determine the basic principles of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) use and established detailed criteria for specializations. One of these principles states that the correct selection of the field of view (FOV) is critical to lowering the effective radiation dose. This study aims to retrospectively analyze CBCT indications and FOV selections as determined by the clinicians in different departments.
Materials and Methods: A total of 8,955 patients’ CBCT data acquired between 2015-2019 were retrospectively scanned. Data were collected and evaluated according to criteria such as FOV, acquisition indications, age, and gender. The chi-square test was used to study the differences between groups with regard to the evaluations among categorical variables.
Results: A statistically significant difference was found when comparing FOV values with CBCT indications (p = 0.000). Images with the highest FOV value of 240 mm x 165 mm were taken primarily for orthognathic surgery planning. The smallest FOV value of 50 mm x 50 mm was seen to be preferred for apical pathologies and odontogenic cysts.
Conclusion: Following the guidelines in the literature, the highest FOV is observed to have been used for cases that cover a larger area, such as is required in orthognathic surgery, while the smallest FOV is observed to be frequently used for endodontic cases performed to evaluate small structures such as root canal morphology and apical pathologies.
Project Number
YOK
References
- 1. Yeung AWK, Jacobs R, Bornstein MM. Novel low-dose protocols using cone beam computed tomography in dental medicine: a review focusing on indications, limitations, and future possibilities. Clin Oral İnvest 2019;23(6):2573-81. google scholar
- 2. Mehta V, Ahmad N. Cone beamed computed tomography in pediatric dentistry: Concepts revisited. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2020;10(2):210-1. google scholar
- 3. Jain S, Choudhary K, Nagi R, Shukla S, Kaur N, Grover D. New evolution of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: Combining digital technologies. İmaging Sci Dent 2019;49(3):179-90. google scholar
- 4. Horner K, İslam M, Flygare L, Tsiklakis K, Whaites E. Basic principles for use of dental cone beam computed tomography: consensus guidelines of the European Academy of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009;38(4):187-95. google scholar
- 5. Pauwels R. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial imaging: dose matters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2015;165(1-4):156-61. google scholar
- 6. Rehani MM, Gupta R, Bartling S,GC Sharp, Pauwels R, Berris T, et al. Radiological Protection in Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). İCRP Publication 129. Ann İCRP 2015;44(1):9-127. google scholar
- 7. Schulze RK, Drage N. Cone-beam computed tomography and its applications in dental and maxillofacial radiology. Clin Radiol 2020;75(9):647-57. google scholar
- 8. Dula K, Bornstein MM, Buser D, Dagassan-Berndt D, Ettlin DA, Filippi A, et al. SADMFR guidelines for the use of cone-beam computed tomography/digital volume tomography. Swiss Dent J 2014;124(11):1169-83. google scholar
- 9. Energy D-Gf. Cone Beam CT For Dental And Maxillofacial Radiology (Evidence-Based Guidelines ) 2012 [Available from: https://www. sedentexct.eu/content/guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology. google scholar
- 10. Hajem S, Brogârdh-Roth S, Nilsson M, Hellen-Halme K. CBCT of Swedish children and adolescents at an oral and maxillofacial radiology department. A survey of requests and indications. Acta Odontol Scand 2020;78(1):38-44. google scholar
- 11. Hol C, Hellen-Halme K, Torgersen G, Nilsson M, M0ystad A. How do dentists use CBCT in dental clinics? A Norwegian nationwide survey. Acta Odontol Scand 2015;73(3):195-201. google scholar
- 12. Al-Okshi A, Theodorakou C, Lindh C. Dose optimization for assessment of periodontal structures in cone beam CT examinations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017;46(3):20160311. google scholar
- 13. de Melo LPL, Oenning ACC, Nadaes MR, Nejaim Y, Neves FS, Oliveira ML, et al. İnfluence of acquisition parameters on the evaluation of mandibular third molars through cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017;124(2):183-90. google scholar
- 14. Neves FS, de Camargo Souza T, de-Azevedo-Vaz SL, Campos PSF, Böscolo FN. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography milliamperage settings on image quality of the mandibular third molar region. Oral Radiol 2014;30(1):27-31. google scholar
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Dentistry |
| Journal Section | Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Project Number | YOK |
| Publication Date | June 30, 2022 |
| Submission Date | March 24, 2022 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2022 Volume: 5 Issue: 2 |
