Effect of ultra-low doses, ASIR and MBIR on density and noise levels of MDCT images of dental implant sites.

Gerlig Widmann, Reema Al-Shawaf, Peter Schullian, Ra'ed Al-Sadhan, Romed Hörmann, Asma'a A Al-Ekrish

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

6citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

Prediction of the as Low as Diagnostically Acceptable CT Dose for Identification of the Inferior Alveolar Canal Using 3D Convolutional Neural Networks with Multi-Balancing Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
Article
Can ultra-low-dose computed tomography reliably diagnose and classify maxillofacial fractures in the clinical routine?Imaging science in dentistry · 2023
Article
As low as diagnostically acceptable dose imaging in maxillofacial trauma: a reference quality approach.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023
Article
Comparability of dental implant site ridge measurements using ultra-low-dose multidetector row computed tomography combined with filtered back-projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and model-based iterative reconstruction.Oral radiology · 2019
Article
Accuracy of computer-aided design models of the jaws produced using ultra-low MDCT doses and ASIR and MBIR.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2018
Article
Ultralow Dose MSCT Imaging in Dental Implantology.The open dentistry journal · 2018
Review

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gerlig WidmannDepartment of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Reema Al-ShawafDepartment of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, P. O. Box 56810, Riyadh, 11564, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Peter SchullianDepartment of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Ra'ed Al-SadhanDepartment of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, P. O. Box 56810, Riyadh, 11564, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Romed HörmannDivision of Clinical and Functional Anatomy, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Asma'a A Al-EkrishDepartment of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, P. O. Box 56810, Riyadh, 11564, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. asma.alekrish@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDifferences in noise and density values in MDCT images obtained using ultra-low doses with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR may possibly affect implant site density analysis. The aim of this study was to compare density and noise measurements recorded from dental implant sites using ultra-low doses combined with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR.

methodsCadavers were scanned using a standard protocol and four low-dose protocols. Scans were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR-50, ASIR-100, and MBIR, and either a bone or standard reconstruction kernel. Density (mean Hounsfield units [HUs]) of alveolar bone and noise levels (mean standard deviation of HUs) was recorded from all datasets and measurements were compared by paired t tests and two-way ANOVA with repeated measures.

resultsSignificant differences in density and noise were found between the reference dose/FBP protocol and almost all test combinations. Maximum mean differences in HU were 178.35 (bone kernel) and 273.74 (standard kernel), and in noise, were 243.73 (bone kernel) and 153.88 (standard kernel).

conclusionsDecreasing radiation dose increased density and noise regardless of reconstruction technique and kernel. The effect of reconstruction technique on density and noise depends on the reconstruction kernel used. KEY POINTS: • Ultra-low-dose MDCT protocols allowed more than 90 % reductions in dose. • Decreasing the dose generally increased density and noise. • Effect of IRT on density and noise varies with reconstruction kernel. • Accuracy of low-dose protocols for interpretation of bony anatomy not known. • Effect of low doses on accuracy of computer-aided design models unknown.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsAlgorithmsCadaverHumansModels, TheoreticalMultidetector Computed TomographyRadiation DosageRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedDental ImplantsAlgorithmsDental implantsImage processing, computer-assistedMultidetector computed tomographyRadiation dosage

Identifiers

PMID27655306

DOI10.1007/s00330-016-4588-8

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.