Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30540919›Full record

ArticleDento maxillo facial radiology2019

Are metal artefact reduction algorithms effective to correct cone beam CT artefacts arising from the exomass?

Amanda Pelegrin Candemil, Benjamin Salmon, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Glaucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano, Francisco Haiter-Neto, Matheus Lima Oliveira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Amanda Pelegrin Candemil1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas , Piracicaba , Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5146-4986
Benjamin Salmon2 Orofacial Pathologies, Imaging and Biotherapies Lab and Dental Medicine Department, Bretonneau Hospital, HUPNVS, AP-HP, Paris Descartes University - Sorbonne Paris Cité , Paris , France.
Deborah Queiroz Freitas1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas , Piracicaba , Brazil.
Glaucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano3 Department of Community Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas , Piracicaba , Brazil.
Francisco Haiter-Neto1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas , Piracicaba , Brazil.
Matheus Lima Oliveira1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas , Piracicaba , Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8054-8759
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of metal artefact reduction (MAR) in cone beam CT (CBCT) artefacts arising from metallic objects in the exomass. A radiographic phantom composed of 16 polypropylene tubes filled with a homogeneous radiopaque solution was created. CBCT scans were obtained with two units: Picasso Trio (Vatech, South Korea) and ProMax (Planmeca, Finland). The phantom was centred in a 5 × 5 cm field-of-view (FOV) with titanium and CoCr inserts in the exomass. All scans were repeated after enabling MAR. Mean voxel values were obtained from the 16 tubes and standard deviation was calculated as a way of measuring voxel value variability. Mean values and voxel value variability were compared individually in the presence and absence of MAR by means of analysis of variance, followed by Tukey's test (α = 0.05). In the Picasso Trio, MAR significantly decreased mean voxel values (p ≤ 0.05) and increased voxel value variability (p > 0.05) in the presence of titanium. When CoCr was present, no statistical difference (p > 0.05) was observed. In the ProMax, MAR increased significantly mean voxel values (p ≤ 0.05) in the presence of titanium, and presented no significant difference (p > 0.05) for CoCr. Voxel value variability did not differ significantly (p > 0.05) for both materials. In conclusion, MAR was not effective to correct CBCT artefacts arising from metallic objects in the exomass in the two CBCT units used.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtifactsCone-Beam Computed TomographyPhantoms, Imagingartifactscone-beam CTdental alloysdental implanttechniques

Identifiers

PMID30540919
PMCPMC6476351
OpenAlexW2905479984

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.