Suppr超能文献

评估不同感兴趣区和视野下的 CBCT 灰度值与亨氏单位的关系。

Assessment of CBCT gray value in different regions-of-interest and fields-of-view compared to Hounsfield unit.

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2023 Nov;52(8):20230187. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20230187. Epub 2023 Oct 24.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Different factors can affect the discrepancy between the gray value (GV) measurements obtained from CBCT and the Hounsfield unit (HU) derived from multidetector CT (MDCT), which is considered the gold-standard density scale. This study aimed to explore the impact of region of interest (ROI) location and field of view (FOV) size on the difference between these two scales as a potential source of error.

METHODS

Three phantoms, each consisting of a water-filled plastic bin containing a dry dentate human skull, were prepared. CBCT scans were conducted using the NewTom VGi evo system, while MDCT scans were performed using Philips system. Three different FOV sizes (8 × 8 cm, 8 × 12 cm, and 12 × 15 cm) were used, and the GVs obtained from eight distinct ROIs were compared with the HUs from the MDCT scans. The ROIs included dental and bony regions within the anterior and posterior areas of both jaws. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v. 26.

RESULTS

The GVs derived from CBCT images were significantly influenced by both ROI location and FOV size ( < 0.05 for both factors). Following the comparison between GVs and HUs, the anterior mandibular bone ROI represented the minimum error, while the posterior mandibular teeth exhibited the maximum error. Moreover, the 8 × 8 cm and 12 × 15 cm FOVs resulted in the lowest and highest degrees of GV error, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROI location and the FOV size can significantly affect the GVs obtained from CBCT images. It is not recommended to use the GV scale within the posterior mandibular teeth region due to the potential for error. Additionally, selecting smaller FOV sizes, such as 8 × 8 cm, can provide GVs closer to the gold-standard numbers.

摘要

目的

不同因素可能会影响从锥形束 CT(CBCT)获得的灰度值(GV)测量值与从多排 CT(MDCT)得出的亨氏单位(HU)之间的差异,后者被认为是密度标准的金标准。本研究旨在探讨感兴趣区域(ROI)位置和视野(FOV)大小对这两个尺度之间差异的影响,因为这可能是误差的一个来源。

方法

制备了三个包含充满水的塑料容器的水模,每个容器内装有一个干燥的人齿状颅骨。使用 NewTom VGi evo 系统进行 CBCT 扫描,使用 Philips 系统进行 MDCT 扫描。使用了三种不同的 FOV 尺寸(8×8 cm、8×12 cm 和 12×15 cm),并比较了从八个不同 ROI 获得的 GV 与 MDCT 扫描的 HU。ROI 包括前颌和后颌的牙齿和骨区域。使用 SPSS v. 26 进行统计分析。

结果

CBCT 图像的 GV 受 ROI 位置和 FOV 大小的显著影响(两个因素均 < 0.05)。在比较 GV 和 HU 之后,前下颌骨 ROI 表示最小的误差,而后下颌牙齿则表示最大的误差。此外,8×8 cm 和 12×15 cm 的 FOV 分别导致了最低和最高程度的 GV 误差。

结论

ROI 位置和 FOV 大小会显著影响从 CBCT 图像获得的 GV。由于存在误差的可能性,不建议在后下颌牙齿区域使用 GV 尺度。此外,选择较小的 FOV 尺寸,如 8×8 cm,可以提供更接近金标准数值的 GV。

相似文献

1
Assessment of CBCT gray value in different regions-of-interest and fields-of-view compared to Hounsfield unit.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2023 Nov;52(8):20230187. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20230187. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
2
Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(1):e1-7. doi: 10.1111/clr.12315. Epub 2013 Dec 11.
4
Can gray values derived from CT and cone beam CT estimate new bone formation? An in vivo study.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Mar;22(1):13-20. doi: 10.1007/s10006-017-0657-7. Epub 2017 Oct 31.
5
Improving the accuracy of bone mineral density using a multisource CBCT.
Sci Rep. 2024 Feb 16;14(1):3887. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-54529-4.
7
Prospects and challenges of rendering tissue density in Hounsfield units for cone beam computed tomography.
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013 Jul;116(1):105-19. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2013.04.013.
10
Influence of cone beam CT scanning parameters on grey value measurements at an implant site.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(3):79884780. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/79884780. Epub 2012 Aug 29.

本文引用的文献

3
A dose-neutral image quality comparison of different CBCT and CT systems using paranasal sinus imaging protocols and phantoms.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Sep;279(9):4407-4414. doi: 10.1007/s00405-022-07271-4. Epub 2022 Jan 27.
4
Can gray values be converted to Hounsfield units? A systematic review.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2022 Jan 1;51(1):20210140. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20210140. Epub 2021 Jun 19.
5
Development of a model of soft tissue simulation using ballistic gelatin for CBCT acquisitions related to dentomaxillofacial radiology research.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2021 Mar 1;50(3):20200191. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20200191. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
7
Comparison of the Hounsfield unit in CT scan with the gray level in cone-beam CT.
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2019 Summer;13(3):177-182. doi: 10.15171/joddd.2019.028. Epub 2019 Oct 7.
8
Evaluation of different soft tissue-simulating materials in pixel intensity values in cone beam computed tomography.
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2019 Apr;127(4):e102-e107. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2018.12.015. Epub 2018 Dec 31.
9
Evaluation of soft tissues simulant materials in cone beam computed tomography.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2019 Jan;48(1):20180072. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20180072. Epub 2018 Jul 20.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验