TODENTJ-25-03-2019_TODENTJ-12-586 1553507470 Bentham Open doi@benthamopen.net Bentham Open The Open Dentistry Journal TODENTJ 1874-2106 08 31 2018 12 1 Abbas Shokri Mohammad Reza Jamalpour Amir Eskandarloo Mostafa Godiny Payam Amini Atefeh Khavid Introduction: Cortical bone is an important anatomical structure and its thickness needs to be determined prior to many dental procedures to ensure treatment success. Imaging modalities are necessarily used in dentistry for treatment planning and dental procedures. Three-dimensional image reconstruction not only provides visual information but also enables accurate measurement of anatomical structures; thus, it is necessarily required for maxillofacial examination and in case of skeletal problems in this region. Aims: This study aimed to assess the ability of three Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) systems including Cranex 3D, NewTom 3G and 3D Promax for Three-Dimensional (3D) image reconstruction of the cortical plate with variable thicknesses. Methods: Depending on the cortical bone thickness, samples were evaluated in three groups of ≤ 0. 5 mm, 0.6 -1 mm and 1.1-1.5 mm cortical bone thickness. The CBCT scans were obtained from each sample using three systems, their respective FOVs, and 3D scans were reconstructed using their software programs. Two observers viewed the images twice with a two-week interval. The ability of each system in the 3D reconstruction of different thicknesses of cortical bone was determined based on its visualization on the scans. The data were analyzed using SPSS and Kappa test. Results: The three systems showed the greatest difference in the 3D reconstruction of cortical bone with < 0.5 mm thickness. Cranex 3D with 4×6 cm2 FOV had the highest and 3D Promax with 8×8 cm2 FOV had the lowest efficacy for 3D reconstruction of cortical bone. Cranex 3D with 4×6 cm2 and 6×8 cm2 FOVs and NewTom 3G with 5×5 cm2 and 8×5 cm2 FOVs showed significantly higher efficacy for 3D reconstruction of cortical bone with 0.6-1mm thickness while 3D Promax followed by NewTom 3G with 8×8 cm2 FOV had the lowest efficacy for this purpose. Conclusion: Most CBCT systems have high efficacy for 3D image reconstruction of cortical bone with thicknesses over 1 mm while they have poor efficacy for image reconstruction of cortical bone with less than 0.5 mm thickness. Thus, for accurate visualization of anatomical structures on CBCT scans, systems with smaller FOVs and consequently smaller voxel size are preferred. 08 31 2018 586 595 TODENTJ-12-586 1 10.2174/crossmark_policy opendentistryjournal.com benthamopen.com true Peer Reviewed Single blind Checked with iThenticate 2018-5-1 2018-6-29 2018-8-10 2018-08-31 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode 10.2174/1874210601812010586 1553507470 https://opendentistryjournal.com/VOLUME/12/PAGE/586/ https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-586/TODENTJ-12-586.xml Clin. Oral Implants Res. Razavi T. 21 718 2010 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01905.x Razavi T, Palmer RM, Davies J, Wilson R, Palmer PJ. Accuracy of measuring the cortical bone thickness adjacent to dental implants using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21 (7) : 718-25. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. Ozdemir F. 143 190 2013 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.09.013 Ozdemir F, Tozlu M, Germec-Cakan D. Cortical bone thickness of the alveolar process measured with cone-beam computed tomography in patients with different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 143 (2) : 190-6. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Nahm K.Y. 41 481 2012 10.1259/dmfr/30845402 Nahm KY, Kang JH, Moon SC, et al. Alveolar bone loss around incisors in class I bidentoalveolar protrusion patients: A retrospective three-dimensional cone beam CT study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41 (6) : 481-8. Hao Y, Zhao W. Assessment of jaw bone density at implant sites using 3D cone beam computed tomography. 2014; . Eur rev med sci 2014; 18 : 1398-403. J. Clin. Exp. Dent. Cassetta M. 5 e245 2013 10.4317/jced.51228 Cassetta M, Sofan AAA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of alveolar cortical bone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant placement. J Clin Exp Dent 2013; 5 (5) : e245-52. Oral Surg. 34 1 2014 Talaat W, Albayatti S. A CBCT measurement of the mandibular buccal bone thickness in dentate adults. Oral Surg 2014; 34 : 1-11. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Swasty D. 67 491 2009 10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.089 Swasty D, Lee JS, Huang JC, et al. Anthropometric analysis of the human mandibular cortical bone as assessed by cone-beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 67 (3) : 491-500. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Klintstrom E. 43 46 2014 Klintstrom E, Lee JS, Smedby O, Klintstrom B. Trabecular bone histomorphometric measurements and contrast to noise ratio in CBCT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43 (8) : 46-58. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Ibrahim N 42 41 2013 Ibrahim N, Parsa A, Hassan B, Van Der Stelt P. The effect of scan parameters on cone beam CT trabecular bone microstructural measurements of the human mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42 (10) : 41-7. Educ. Psychol. Meas. Cohen J. 20 37 1960 10.1177/001316446002000104 Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20 : 37-46. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. Wang J. 12 235 2009 Wang J, Ye M, Liu ZH. Precision of cortical bone reconstruction based on 3D CT scans. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2009; 12 : 235-41. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. Loubele M. 102 225 2006 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.10.039 Loubele M, Maes F, Schutyser F, Marchal G, Jacobs R, Suetens P. Assessment of bone segmentation quality of cone-beam CT versus multislice spiral CT: A pilot study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102 (2) : 225-34. J Clin Periodontol Van Assche N. 34 816 2007 Van Assche N, van Steenberghe D, Guerrero ME. Accuracy of implant placement based on pre-surgical planning of three-dimensional cone-beam images: A pilot study. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34 : 816-21. Eur. J. Radiol. Liang X. 75 270 2010 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.04.016 Liang X, Lambrichts I, Sun Y, et al. A comparative evaluation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multi-Slice CT (MSCT). Part II: On 3D model accuracy. Eur J Radiol 2010; 75 (2) : 270-4. Comp Methods Prog Biomed Viceconti M 59 159 1999 Viceconti M, Zannoni C, Testi D, et al. CT data sets surface extraction for biomechanical modeling of long bones. Comp Methods Prog Biomed 1999; 59 : 159-66. Clin. Oral Investig. Hassan B. 14 303 2010 10.1007/s00784-009-0291-3 Hassan B, Couto Souza P, Jacobs R, de Azambuja Berti S, van der Stelt P. Influence of scanning and reconstruction parameters on quality of three-dimensional surface models of the dental arches from cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 2010; 14 (3) : 303-10. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Hedesiu M. 41 548 2012 10.1259/dmfr/19322177 Hedesiu M, Baciut M, Baciut G, Nackaerts O, Jacobs R. Comparison of cone beam CT device and field of view for the detection of simulated periapical bone lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41 (7) : 548-52. Int. Endod. J. Kamburoglu K, 43 798 2010 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01749.x Kamburoglu K,, Kursun S. A comparison of diagnostic accuracy of CBCT images of different voxel resolutions to detect simulated small internal resorption cavities. Int Endod J 2010; 43 : 798-807. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. Wenzel A. 108 939 2009 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.07.041 Wenzel A, Haiter-Neto F, Frydenberg M, Kirkevang LL. Variable-resolution cone-beam computerized tomography with enhancement filtration compared with intraoral photostimulable phosphor radiography in detection of transverse root fractures in an in vitro model. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 108 (6) : 939-45. J. Endod. Melo S.L. 36 1879 2010 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.025 Melo SL, Bortoluzzi EA, Abreu M Jr, Corrêa LR, Corrêa M. Diagnostic ability of a cone-beam computed tomography scan to assess longitudinal root fractures in prosthetically treated teeth. J Endod 2010; 36 (11) : 1879-82. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. Librizzi Z.T. 140 e25 2011 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.012 Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM. Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: Effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140 (1) : e25-30. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Maret D. 41 649 2012 10.1259/dmfr/81804525 Maret D, Telmon N, Peters OA, et al. Effect of voxel size on the accuracy of 3D reconstructions with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41 (8) : 649-55. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. Chakeres D.W. 5 297 1984 Chakeres DW. Clinical significance of partial volume averaging of the temporal bone. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1984; 5 (3) : 297-302. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. Molen A.D. 137 S130 2010 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.01.015 Molen AD. Considerations in the use of cone-beam computed tomography for buccal bone measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137 (4) (Suppl.) : S130-5. Bone Kothari M. 22 437 1998 10.1016/S8756-3282(98)00031-3 Kothari M, Keaveny TM, Lin JC, Newitt DC, Genant HK, Majumdar S. Impact of spatial resolution on the prediction of trabecular architecture parameters. Bone 1998; 22 (5) : 437-43.