Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study
Background and Aim: Even though cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging is a propitious tool to track the mandibular/ inferior alveolar canal (MC) course, documentation regarding indefectible CBCT imaging strategy for MC localization is sparse. This study aimed to appraise CBCT's functioni...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jiaomr.in/article.asp?issn=0972-1363;year=2022;volume=34;issue=3;spage=309;epage=313;aulast=Joy |
| _version_ | 1797995547362066432 |
|---|---|
| author | Rini Joy A Kannan Krithika C Lakshmi D K S. Lakshminrusimhan Anitha Roy |
| author_facet | Rini Joy A Kannan Krithika C Lakshmi D K S. Lakshminrusimhan Anitha Roy |
| author_sort | Rini Joy |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background and Aim: Even though cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging is a propitious tool to track the mandibular/ inferior alveolar canal (MC) course, documentation regarding indefectible CBCT imaging strategy for MC localization is sparse. This study aimed to appraise CBCT's functioning at specified voxel sizes for deducing an explicit voxel size setting that simplifies MC evaluation in individual imaging sections. Materials and Methods: CBCT scan of 12 dry human mandibles was produced at 0.5, 0.3, 0.25, and 0.2 mm voxel settings. Two specialists/assessors explored the generated images in coronal (buccolingual) and curved (anterior-posterior) sections. Statistical Analyses: Mann–Whitney U, Kruskal–Wallis, post-hoc Tukey HSD, and Kappa statistics. Results: All voxel specifications revealed appreciable statistical variance; coronal sections comparatively excelled in serving the study objective. Statistical authentication was spotted among voxel sizes 0.5–0.2 mm and 0.5–0.25 mm (both assessors, either section), 0.3–0.2 mm (first specialist, curved), and 0.3–0.5 mm (second specialist, curved). Inter-observer agreement was excellent for voxels 0.25 mm (coronal) and 0.2 mm (curved). Conclusion: Precise voxel setting to trace MC is 0.3 mm and the suitable imaging section is coronal. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T10:03:24Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-da73472f15114d21a551d746df64d405 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0972-1363 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T10:03:24Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-da73472f15114d21a551d746df64d4052022-12-22T04:30:19ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology0972-13632022-01-0134330931310.4103/jiaomr.jiaomr_244_21Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro StudyRini JoyA KannanKrithika C LakshmiD K S. LakshminrusimhanAnitha RoyBackground and Aim: Even though cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging is a propitious tool to track the mandibular/ inferior alveolar canal (MC) course, documentation regarding indefectible CBCT imaging strategy for MC localization is sparse. This study aimed to appraise CBCT's functioning at specified voxel sizes for deducing an explicit voxel size setting that simplifies MC evaluation in individual imaging sections. Materials and Methods: CBCT scan of 12 dry human mandibles was produced at 0.5, 0.3, 0.25, and 0.2 mm voxel settings. Two specialists/assessors explored the generated images in coronal (buccolingual) and curved (anterior-posterior) sections. Statistical Analyses: Mann–Whitney U, Kruskal–Wallis, post-hoc Tukey HSD, and Kappa statistics. Results: All voxel specifications revealed appreciable statistical variance; coronal sections comparatively excelled in serving the study objective. Statistical authentication was spotted among voxel sizes 0.5–0.2 mm and 0.5–0.25 mm (both assessors, either section), 0.3–0.2 mm (first specialist, curved), and 0.3–0.5 mm (second specialist, curved). Inter-observer agreement was excellent for voxels 0.25 mm (coronal) and 0.2 mm (curved). Conclusion: Precise voxel setting to trace MC is 0.3 mm and the suitable imaging section is coronal.http://www.jiaomr.in/article.asp?issn=0972-1363;year=2022;volume=34;issue=3;spage=309;epage=313;aulast=Joycone-beam computed tomographymandibular canalradiation exposurevoxel size |
| spellingShingle | Rini Joy A Kannan Krithika C Lakshmi D K S. Lakshminrusimhan Anitha Roy Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology cone-beam computed tomography mandibular canal radiation exposure voxel size |
| title | Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study |
| title_full | Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study |
| title_short | Comparison of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Performance at Different Voxel Sizes in the Evaluation of Mandibular Canal – An In vitro Study |
| title_sort | comparison of cone beam computed tomography performance at different voxel sizes in the evaluation of mandibular canal an in vitro study |
| topic | cone-beam computed tomography mandibular canal radiation exposure voxel size |
| url | http://www.jiaomr.in/article.asp?issn=0972-1363;year=2022;volume=34;issue=3;spage=309;epage=313;aulast=Joy |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rinijoy comparisonofconebeamcomputedtomographyperformanceatdifferentvoxelsizesintheevaluationofmandibularcanalaninvitrostudy AT akannan comparisonofconebeamcomputedtomographyperformanceatdifferentvoxelsizesintheevaluationofmandibularcanalaninvitrostudy AT krithikaclakshmi comparisonofconebeamcomputedtomographyperformanceatdifferentvoxelsizesintheevaluationofmandibularcanalaninvitrostudy AT dkslakshminrusimhan comparisonofconebeamcomputedtomographyperformanceatdifferentvoxelsizesintheevaluationofmandibularcanalaninvitrostudy AT anitharoy comparisonofconebeamcomputedtomographyperformanceatdifferentvoxelsizesintheevaluationofmandibularcanalaninvitrostudy |