ArticleClinical oral investigations2022
Impact of metal artefacts on subjective perception of image quality of 13 CBCT devices.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability and agreement of CBCT-based alveolar bone assessments for follow-up studies on adolescent orthodontic patients using multiplanar reconstruction and various CBCT units.Progress in orthodontics · 2026Trial
- Definite Implant Position as Novel Readout for Effectiveness of Ridge Preservation Indicates to Beneficial Effect of Combined Treatment with Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) and Xenogenic Biomaterial in Bone Regeneration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of artifacts in cone-beam computed tomography from different intraradicular pins and cementation materials using different exposure protocols.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Photon-Counting CT for Diagnosing Vertical Root Fractures in Teeth With Metal Posts: An Ex Vivo Comparative Analysis With Four CBCT Devices.International endodontic journal · 2026Article
- AI-assisted preoperative surgical planning for dental implant.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Ex Vivo Quantitative Evaluation of Beam Hardening Artifacts at Various Implant Locations in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Using Metal Artifact Reduction and Noise Reduction Techniques.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Orthograde Endodontic Retreatment Following Apicoectomy and Resorption of Extruded MTA-A Case Report With 8-Year Follow-Up.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Application of artifact suppression algorithm of post-processing CBCT software in root canal filling materials.Brazilian oral research · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of the accuracy of electronic apex locators and cone-beam computed tomography in detection of root canal perforation and working length during endodontic retreatment.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Expression of artefacts from different orthodontic brackets and wires in cone beam computed tomography scans-an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Examination Methods for Periapical Lesion Diagnostics: Assessing Cone-Beam Computer Tomography, Ultrasound, and Periapical Radiography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Feasibility of frozen soft tissues to simulate fresh soft tissue conditions in cone beam CT scans.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of photon-counting computed tomography as a novel imaging modality for challenging endodontic diagnostic tasks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Image quality for visualization of cracks and fine endodontic structures using 10 CBCT devices with various scanning protocols and artefact conditions.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe overall objective of this study was to assess how metal artefacts impact image quality of 13 CBCT devices. As a secondary objective, the influence of scanning protocols and field of view on CBCT image quality with and without metal artefacts was also assessed. MATERIALS AND
methodsCBCT images were acquired of a dry human skull phantom considering three clinical simulated conditions: one without metal and two with metallic materials (metallic pin and implant). An industrial micro-CT was used as a reference to register the CBCT images. Afterwards, four observers evaluated 306 representative image slices from 13 devices, ranking them from best to worst. Furthermore, within each device, medium FOV and small FOV standard images were compared. General linear mixed models were used to assess subjective perception of examiners on overall image quality in the absence and presence of metal-related artefacts (p < 0.05).
resultsImage quality perception significantly differed amongst CBCT devices (p < 0.05). Some devices performed significantly better, independently of scanning protocol and clinical condition. In the presence of metal artefacts, medium FOV standard scanning protocols scored significantly better, while in the absence of metal, small FOV standard yielded the highest performance.
conclusionsSubjective image quality differs significantly amongst CBCT devices and scanning protocols. Metal-related artefacts may highly impact image quality, with a significant device-dependent variability and only few scanners being more robust against metal artefacts. Often, metal artefact expression may be somewhat reduced by proper protocol selection. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Metallic objects may severely impact image quality in several CBCT devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35166942What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.