Article citationsMore>>

Katsumata, A., Hirukawa, A., Noujeim, M., Okumura, S., Naitoh, M., Fujishita, M., Ariji, E. and Langlais, R.P. (2006) Image Artifact in Dental Cone-Beam CT. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endoddontology, 101, 652-657.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.07.027

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Comparative Evaluation of Fractal Dimensions of CBCT Images Obtained with i-CAT Next Generation and PreXion 3D Elite Scanners

  AUTHORS: Carlos E. P. Toledo, Marcio J. S. Campos, Roberto S. M. F. de Oliveira, Robert W. F. Vitral

  KEYWORDS: Bone Density, X-Ray Computed Tomography, Fractals

  JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Vol.11 No.12, December 28, 2018

  ABSTRACT: Comparing Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) exams with different fields of view (FOV) are relevant to understand the impact of the inherent image quality on the reliability and accuracy of the diagnostic outcome. This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the results of the fractal analysis of images of the same structure taken in two cone beam computerized scanners with different FOVs. The initial selection of the images used, from two CBCT of the same individual jaw performed in two different scanners, was conducted in the Radiant program (RadiAnt DICOM Viewer) and exported to DICOM format. The selected images were processed in the ImageJ software (US National Institutes of Health), correcting the rotation of the images before conducting fractal analysis. In order to verify the normality of the data, the Shapiro-Wilk test was applied. The Mann-Whitney U, Levene and T tests were applied in order to compare the fractal analysis obtained by the two CBCT scanners. The intraclass correlation coefficient result was 0.988. The mean of the samples in the three comparisons (mentum samples, mental foramen samples and all included mentum and mental foramen samples) was higher for the PreXion 3D scanner. The p value of the tests was 0.000, for the three comparisons, at a 5% confidence level. The comparison of the fractal dimension averages of the images obtained with i-CAT and PreXion 3D scanners showed statistically significant differences, and higher averages were observed in the fractal analysis of images from PreXion 3D scanner. These results point to the need for a careful analysis of the parameters involved in the acquisition of images when results of fractal analysis resulting from different equipment are compared.