ArticleImaging science in dentistry2024
Impact of the spatial orientation of the patient's head, metal artifact reduction, and tube current on cone-beam computed tomography artifact expression adjacent to a dental implant: A laboratory study using a simulated surgical guide.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Investigating the effectiveness of MAR algorithm on magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images: a systematic review.Oral radiology · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate image artifacts in the vicinity of dental implants in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans obtained with different spatial orientations, tube current levels, and metal artifact reduction algorithm (MAR) conditions. Materials and Methods: One dental implant and 2 tubes filled with a radiopaque solution were placed in the posterior region of a mandible using a surgical guide to ensure parallel alignment. CBCT scans were acquired with the mandible in 2 spatial orientations in relation to the X-ray projection plane (standard and modified) at 3 tube current levels: 5, 8, and 11 mA. CBCT scans were repeated without the implant and were reconstructed with and without MAR. The mean voxel and noise values of each tube were obtained and compared using multi-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test (α=0.05). Results: Mean voxel values were significantly higher and noise values were significantly lower in the modified orientation than in the standard orientation ( Conclusion: Modifying the spatial orientation of the head increased brightness and reduced spatial orientation noise in adjacent regions of a dental implant, with no influence from the tube current level and MAR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.