Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Optimizing cone-beam computed tomography exposure for an effective radiation dose and image quality balance

  • Ananda Amaral Santos (Department of Oral Radiology, University of Anapolis) ;
  • Brunno Santos de Freitas Silva (Department of Stomatologic Sciences, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goias) ;
  • Fernanda Ferreira Nunes Correia (Department of Stomatologic Sciences, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goias) ;
  • Eleazar Mezaiko (Department of Stomatologic Sciences, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goias) ;
  • Camila Ferro de Souza Roriz (Department of Oral Radiology, University of Anapolis) ;
  • Maria Alves Garcia Silva (Department of Oral Radiology, University of Anapolis) ;
  • Deborah Queiroz Freitas (Division of Oral Radiology, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas) ;
  • Fernanda Paula Yamamoto-Silva (Department of Stomatologic Sciences, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goias)
  • Received : 2023.11.21
  • Accepted : 2024.01.11
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition protocols on reducing the effective radiation dose while maintaining image quality. Materials and Methods: The effective dose emitted by a CBCT device was calculated using thermoluminescent dosimeters placed in a Rando Alderson phantom. Image quality was assessed by 3 experienced evaluators. The relationship between image quality and confidence was evaluated using the Fisher exact test, and the agreement among raters was assessed using the kappa test. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to investigate whether the technical parameters could predict the effective dose. P-values<0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Results: The optimized protocol (3 mA, 99 kVp, and 450 projection images) demonstrated good image quality and a lower effective dose for radiation-sensitive organs. Image quality and confidence had consistent values for all structures (P<0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis resulted in a statistically significant model. The milliamperage (b=0.504; t=3.406; P=0.027), kilovoltage peak (b=0.589; t=3.979; P=0.016) and number of projection images (b=0.557; t=3.762; P=0.020) were predictors of the effective dose. Conclusion: Optimized CBCT acquisition protocols can significantly reduce the effective radiation dose while maintaining acceptable image quality by adjusting the milliamperage and projection images.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by grants from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, grant 423885/2018-9 to F.P.Y.S.) and FUNADESP (4-1383/2022).

References

  1. European Commission. Radiation protection No 172. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Evidence based guidelines [Internet]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2012 [cited 2023 Nov 20]. Available from: https://sedentexct.eu/files/radiation_protection_172_1.pdf.
  2. Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent 2015; 45: 263-5.
  3. De Grauwe A, Ayaz I, Shujaat S, Dimitrov S, Gbadegbegnon L, Vande Vannet B, et al. CBCT in orthodontics: a systematic review on justification of CBCT in a paediatric population prior orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod 2019; 41: 381-9.
  4. da Silva Moura W, Chiqueto K, Pithon GM, Neves LS, Castro R, Henriques JFC. Factors influencing the effective dose associated with CBCT: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 2019; 23: 1319-30.
  5. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32: 229-34.
  6. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 219-26.
  7. Martins LAC, Brasil DM, Forner LA, Viccari C, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas DQ, et al. Does dose optimisation in digital panoramic radiography affect diagnostic performance? Clin Oral Investig 2021; 25: 637-43.
  8. Clero E, Vaillant L, Zhang W, Hamada N, Preston DL, Lauirer D, et al. ICRP publication 152: radiation detriment calculation methodology. Ann ICRP 2022; 51: 1-103.
  9. Belmans N, Gilles L, Vermeesen R, Virag P, Hedesiu M, Salmon B, et al. Quantification of DNA double strand breaks and oxidation response in children and adults undergoing dental CBCT scan. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 2113.
  10. McGuigan MB, Duncan HF, Horner K. An analysis of effective dose optimization and its impact on image quality and diagnostic efficacy relating to dental cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Swiss Dent J 2018; 128: 297-316.
  11. Kadesjo N, Benchimol D, Falahat B, Nasstrom K, Shi XQ. Evaluation of the effective dose of cone beam CT and multislice CT for temporomandibular joint examinations at optimized exposure levels. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20150041.
  12. Pauwels R, Zhang G, Theodorakou C, Walker A, Bosmans H, Jacobs R, et al. Effective radiation dose and eye lens dose in dental cone beam CT: effect of field of view and angle of rotation. Br J Radiol 2014; 87: 20130654.
  13. Palomo JM, Rao PS, Hans MG. Influence of CBCT exposure conditions on radiation dose. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105: 773-82.
  14. Jadu F, Yaffe MJ, Lam EW. A comparative study of the effective radiation doses from cone beam computed tomography and plain radiography for sialography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39: 257-63.
  15. Al-Okshi A, Theodorakou C, Lindh C. Dose optimization for assessment of periodontal structures in cone beam CT examinations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160311.
  16. Ihlis RL, Kadesjo N, Tsilingaridis G, Benchimol D, Shi XQ. Image quality assessment of low-dose protocols in cone beam computed tomography of the anterior maxilla. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2022; 133: 483-91.
  17. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 106: 106-14.
  18. Helmrot E, Thilander-Klang A. Methods for monitoring patient dose in dental radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2010; 139: 303-5.
  19. Chinem LA, Vilella Bde S, Mauricio CL, Canevaro LV, Deluiz LF, Vilella Ode V. Digital orthodontic radiographic set versus cone-beam computed tomography: an evaluation of the effective dose. Dental Press J Orthod 2016; 21: 66-72.
  20. Roberts JA, Drage NA, Davies J, Thomas DW. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry. Br J Radiol 2009; 82: 35-40.
  21. Ludlow JB, Walker C. Assessment of phantom dosimetry and image quality of i-CAT FLX cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144: 802-17.
  22. Grunheid T, Kolbeck-Schieck JR, Pliska BT, Ahmad M, Larson BE. Dosimetry of a cone-beam computed tomography machine compared with a digital x-ray machine in orthodontic imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 141: 436-43.
  23. Ludlow JB. A manufacturer's role in reducing the dose of cone beam computed tomography examinations: effect of beam filtration. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40: 115-22.
  24. Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E, Pauwels R, Vanheusden S, Suetens P, et al. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol 2009; 71: 461-8.
  25. Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 267-71.
  26. Hofmann E, Schmid M, Sedlmair M, Banckwitz R, Hirschfelder U, Lell M. Comparative study of image quality and radiation dose of cone beam and low-dose multislice computed tomography - an in-vitro investigation. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 301-11.
  27. Oenning AC, Jacobs R, Salmon B, DIMITRA Research Group (http://www.dimitra.be). ALADAIP, beyond ALARA and towards personalized optimization for paediatric cone-beam CT. Int J Paediatr Dent 2021; 31: 676-8.