Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Author(s): Tao Gao, Yuchun Sun*, Fusong Yuan and Shanshan Liang

DOI: 10.2174/1573405619666230217121745

DownloadDownload PDF Flyer Cite As
Evaluation and Calibration of CBCT Reconstruction Models

Article ID: e170223213764 Pages: 6

  • * (Excluding Mailing and Handling)

Abstract

Purpose: This study proposes a method for improving the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) models generated through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Methods: A 3D cuboid model fitted with a ¼-scale dentition on its top surface was constructed to simulate an alveolar bone with teeth. A physical specimen of the model was printed and the distance between its opposite sides was measured using a vernier caliper. The physical model was light-scanned, and the surface data of the generated 3D model were corrected by calibrating the distance between opposite sides against the vernier caliper measurements. The physical model was also scanned using CBCT to reconstruct a second 3D model. The overall deviation between the two models and the distance deviation in each direction of the cuboid and dentition were quantified and statistically analyzed.

Results: The overall deviation between the reconstructed CBCT model and the calibrated structured light-scanned model was 0.098 ± 0.001 mm. Following calibration, the overall deviation was 0.010 ± 0.006 mm. A one-way variance analysis suggested that the overall deviations' differences were not statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: This study lays a solid foundation for accurate dental implantation.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Chee W, Jivraj S. Failures in implant dentistry. Br Dent J 2007; 202(3): 123-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.74] [PMID: 17293814]
[2]
Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM. Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29 (Suppl. 16): 393-415.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13142] [PMID: 30328204]
[3]
Watanabe H, Mohammad Abdul M, Kurabayashi T, Aoki H. Mandible size and morphology determined with CT on a premise of dental implant operation. Surg Radiol Anat 2010; 32(4): 343-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00276-009-0570-3] [PMID: 19812884]
[4]
Lam M, Koong C, Kruger E, Tennant M. Prevalence of accessory mental foramina: A study of 4,000 CBCT scans. Clin Anat 2019; 32(8): 1048-52.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ca.23434] [PMID: 31301240]
[5]
Abduo J, Lau D. Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: In vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols. Int J Implant Dent 2020; 6(1): 10.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-0205-3] [PMID: 32157478]
[6]
Malik HH, Darwood ARJ, Shaunak S, et al. Three-dimensional printing in surgery: A review of current surgical applications. J Surg Res 2015; 199(2): 512-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.06.051] [PMID: 26255224]
[7]
Aldaadaa A, Owji N, Knowles J. Three-dimensional printing in maxillofacial surgery: Hype versus reality. J Tissue Eng 2018; 9: 2041731418770909.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2041731418770909] [PMID: 29774140]
[8]
Ackland DC, Robinson D, Redhead M, Lee PVS, Moskaljuk A, Dimitroulis G. A personalized 3D-printed prosthetic joint replacement for the human temporomandibular joint: From implant design to implantation. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2017; 69: 404-11.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.01.048] [PMID: 28199931]
[9]
Van Dessel J, Nicolielo LF, Huang Y, et al. Accuracy and reliability of different cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices for structural analysis of alveolar bone in comparison with multislice CT and micro-CT. Eur J Oral Implantology 2017; 10(1): 95-105.
[PMID: 28327698]
[10]
Yimarj P, Subbalekha K, Dhanesuan K, Siriwatana K, Mattheos N, Pimkhaokham A. Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020; 22(6): 672-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.12949] [PMID: 32939934]
[11]
Wusiman P, Nie B, Li WD, Moming A. Management of mandibular angle fractures using 3- dimensional or standard miniplates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2019; 47(4): 622-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2019.01.032] [PMID: 30773329]
[12]
Kruse C, Spin-Neto R, Reibel J, Wenzel A, Kirkevang LL. Diagnostic validity of periapical radiography and CBCT for assessing periapical lesions that persist after endodontic surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46(7): 20170210.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20170210] [PMID: 28707526]
[13]
Nilsson J, Richards RG, Thor A, Kamer L. Virtual bite registration using intraoral digital scanning, CT and CBCT: in vitro evaluation of a new method and its implication for orthognathic surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016; 44(9): 1194-200.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2016.06.013] [PMID: 27423538]
[14]
Byakova SF, Novozhilova NE, Makeeva IM, Grachev VI, Kasatkina IV. The accuracy of CBCT for the detection and diagnosis of vertical root fractures in vivo. Int Endod J 2019; 52(9): 1255-63.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iej.13114] [PMID: 30861149]
[15]
Zhou J, Li S, Ye C, et al. Analysis of local setup errors of sub-regions in cone-beam CT-guided post-mastectomy radiation therapy. J Radiat Res (Tokyo) 2020; 61(3): 457-63.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rraa007] [PMID: 32100830]
[16]
Portelli M, Militi A, Lo Giudice A, et al. 3d assessment of endodontic lesions with a Low-Dose CBCT protocol. Dent J 2020; 8(2): 51.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj8020051]
[17]
Schwindling FS, Hilgenfeld T, Weber D, Kosinski MA, Rammelsberg P, Tasaka A. In vitro diagnostic accuracy of low-dose CBCT for evaluation of peri-implant bone lesions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019; 30(12): 1200-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13533] [PMID: 31505065]
[18]
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.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.04.016] [PMID: 19423257]
[19]
Sarmento VA, de Oliveira Gonzalez TFL, Lopes RT, Novaes M, Borges SM, Rubira-Bullen IRF. A comparative study of multidetector computed tomography, cone beam computed tomography, and computed microtomography on trabecular bone structures in the human mandible: An ex vivo study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2021; 45(4): 552-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001191] [PMID: 34270480]
[20]
Dwivedi N, Nagarajappa AK, Tiwari R. Artifacts: The downturn of CBCT image. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2015; 5(6): 440-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.170523] [PMID: 26759795]
[21]
dos Santos JG, Oliveira Reis Durão AP, de Campos Felino AC, de Faria de Almeida RMCL. Analysis of the buccal bone plate, root inclination and alveolar bone dimensions in the jawbone. A descriptive study using cone-beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2019; 10(2): e4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10204] [PMID: 31404187]
[22]
Mupparapu M, Nadeau C. Oral and maxillofacial imaging. Dent Clin North Am 2016; 60(1): 1-37.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2015.08.001] [PMID: 26614948]
[23]
van Daatselaar AN, Dunn SM, Spoelder HJW, et al. Feasibility of local CT of dental tissues. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32(3): 173-80.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/28402359] [PMID: 12917283]
[24]
Kulczyk T. Dyszkiewicz Konwińska M, Owecka M, Krzyżostaniak J, Surdacka A. The influence of amalgam fillings on the detection of approximal caries by cone beam CT: In vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43(7): 20130342.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130342] [PMID: 24986630]
[25]
Yuan F, Chen L, Wang X, Wang Y, Lyu P, Sun Y. Comparative evaluation of the artefacts index of dental materials on two-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography. Sci Rep 2016; 6(1): 26107.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep26107] [PMID: 27185627]