nach oben

Erschienen in:

11.01.2018 | Review Article

Clinical guidelines for dental cone-beam computed tomography

verfasst von: Takafumi Hayashi, Yoshinori Arai, Toru Chikui, Sachiko Hayashi-Sakai, Kazuya Honda, Hiroko Indo, Taisuke Kawai, Kaoru Kobayashi, Shumei Murakami, Masako Nagasawa, Munetaka Naitoh, Eiji Nakayama, Yutaka Nikkuni, Hideyoshi Nishiyama, Noriaki Shoji, Shigeaki Suenaga, Ray Tanaka, A Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines, Japanese Society for Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology

Erschienen in: Oral Radiology | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Dental cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) received regulatory approval in Japan in 2000 and has been widely used since being approved for coverage by the National Health Insurance system in 2012. This imaging technique allows dental practitioners to observe and diagnose lesions in the dental hard tissue in three dimensions (3D). When performing routine radiography, the examination must be justified, and optimal protection should be provided according to the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principles laid down by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Dental CBCT should be performed in such a way that the radiation exposure is minimized and the benefits to the patient are maximized. There is a growing demand for widespread access to cutting-edge health care through Japan’s universal health insurance system. However, at the same time, people want our limited human, material, and financial resources to be used efficiently while providing safe health care at the least possible cost to society. Japan’s aging population is expected to reach a peak in 2025, when most of the baby boomer generation will be aged 75 years or older. Comprehensive health care networks are needed to overcome these challenges. Against this background, we hope that this text will contribute to the nation’s oral health by encouraging efficient use of dental CBCT.

Hounsfield G. Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography) Part 1. Description of system. Br J Radiol. 1973;46:1016–22.PubMed

Robb RA, Greenleaf JF, Ritman EL, Johnson SA, Sjostrand JD, Herman GT, et al. Three-dimensional visualization of the intact thorax and contents: a technique for cross-sectional reconstruction from multiplanar X-ray views. Comput Biomed Res. 1974;7:395–419.PubMed

Robb RA. The dynamic spatial reconstructor: an X-ray video-fluoroscopic CT scanner for dynamic volume imaging of moving organs. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1982;1:122–33.

Toyofuku F, Konishi K, Kanda S. Fluoroscopic computed tomography: an attempt at 3-D imaging of teeth and jaw bones. Oral Radiol. 1986;2:9–13.

Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998;8:1558–64.PubMed

Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28:245–8.PubMed

Lennon S, Patel S, Foschi F, Wilson R, Davies J, Mannocci F. Diagnostic accuracy of limited-volume cone-beam computed tomography in the detection of periapical bone loss: 360° scans versus 180° scans. Int Endod J. 2011;44:1118–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01930.x.PubMed

Arnheiter C, Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Trends in maxillofacial cone-beam computed tomography usage. Oral Radiol. 2006;22:80–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-006-0055-6.

Davies J, Johnson B, Drage N. Effective doses from cone beam CT investigation of the jaws. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41:30–6. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/30177908.PubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Bumann A, Visser H, Hirsch E. Cone-beam computed tomography for routine orthodontic treatment planning: a radiation dose evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133:640.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.11.019.

11.

Loubele M, Jacobs R, Maes F, Denis K, White S, Coudyzer W, et al. Image quality vs radiation dose of four cone beam computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37:309–18. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/16770531.PubMed

12.

Lofthag-Hansen S, Thilander-Klang A, Ekestubbe A, Helmrot E, Gröndahl K. Calculating effective dose on a cone beam computed tomography device: 3D Accuitomo and 3D Accuitomo FPD. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37:72–9. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/60375385.PubMed

13.

Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, Käser Y, Peltola J, Kortesniemi M. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:367–78. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/15779208.PubMed

14.

Hirata T, Inoue K, Shigemori S, Matsuzaki M, Inatomi K. Estimation of exposure dose on MDCT examination—the measurement of organ dose and effective dose by anthropomorphic phantom. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2010;66:901–10 (Japanese).PubMed

15.

Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:267–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.11.028.PubMed

16.

Rottke D, Patzelt S, Poxleitner P, Schulze D. Effective dose span of ten different cone beam CT devices. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120417. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120417.PubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, Hunter R, Benavides E, Samuelson DB, et al. Effective dose of dental CBCT—a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140197. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140197.PubMed

18.

Hirsch E, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Silva MA. Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37:268–73. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/23424132.PubMed

19.

Araki K, Patil S, Endo A, Okano T. Dose indices in dental cone beam CT and correlation with dose-area product. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120362. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120362.PubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Horner K. Cone-beam computed tomography: time for an evidence-based approach. Prim Dent J. 2013;2:22–31.PubMed

21.

Okano T, Matsuo A, Gotoh K, Yokoi M, Hirukawa A, Okumura S, et al. Comparison of absorbed and effective dose from two dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2012;68:216–25 (Japanese).PubMed

22.

Endo A, Katoh T, Vasudeva SB, Kobayashi I, Okano T. A preliminary study to determine the diagnostic reference level using dose-area product for limited-area cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120097. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120097.PubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, White SC. Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139:1237–43. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0339.PubMed

24.

Patel S, Durack C, Abella F, Shemesh H, Roig M, Lemberg K. Cone beam computed tomography in endodontics—a review. Int Endod J. 2015;48:3–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12270.PubMed

25.

Gurtu A, Aggarwal A, Mohan S, Singhal A, Bansal R, Agnihotri K. CBCT: a revolutionary diagnostic aid for endodontic dilemmas. Miner Stomatol. 2014;63:325–31.

26.

American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Clinical recommendations regarding use of cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics [corrected]. Position statement by the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013;116:238–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.06.002.

27.

Scarfe WC, Li Z, Aboelmaaty W, Scott SA, Farman AG. Maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography: essence, elements and steps to interpretation. Aust Dent J. 2012;57(Suppl 1):46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01657.x.PubMed

28.

Anderson PJ, Yong R, Surman TL, Rajion ZA, Ranjitkar S. Application of three-dimensional computed tomography in craniofacial clinical practice and research. Aust Dent J. 2014;59(Suppl 1):174–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12154.PubMed

29.

Halperin-Sternfeld M, Machtei EE, Balkow C, Horwitz J. Patient movement during extraoral radiographic scanning. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:40–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0208-6.

30.

Theodorakou C, Walker A, Horner K, Pauwels R, Bogaerts R, Jacobs R, et al. Estimation of paediatric organ and effective doses from dental cone beam CT using anthropomorphic phantoms. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:153–60. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/19389412.PubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Al Najjar A, Colosi D, Dauer LT, Prins R, Patchell G, Branets I, et al. Comparison of adult and child radiation equivalent doses from 2 dental cone-beam computed tomography units. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;143:784–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.PubMed

32.

Aps JK. Cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: overview of recent literature. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2013;14:131–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-013-0029-4.PubMed

33.

Shin HS, Nam KC, Park H, Choi HU, Kim HY, Park CS. Effective doses from panoramic radiography and CBCT (cone beam CT) using dose area product (DAP) in dentistry. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43:20130439. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130439.PubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Hidalgo Rivas JA, Horner K, Thiruvenkatachari B, Davies J, Theodorakou C. Development of a low-dose protocol for cone beam CT examinations of the anterior maxilla in children. Br J Radiol. 2015;88:20150559. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150559.PubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Choi E, Ford NL. Measuring absorbed dose for i-CAT CBCT examinations in child, adolescent and adult phantoms. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20150018. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150018.PubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Tanimoto H, Arai Y. The effect of voxel size on image reconstruction in cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2009;25:149–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0019-8.

37.

Pauwels R, Faruangsaeng T, Charoenkarn T, Ngonphloy N, Panmekiate S. Effect of exposure parameters and voxel size on bone structure analysis in CBCT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20150078. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150078.PubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Hashem D, Brown JE, Patel S, Mannocci F, Donaldson AN, Watson TF, et al. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of measurements obtained from high- and low-resolution cone-beam computed tomography scans. J Endod. 2013;39:394–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.017.PubMed

39.

Al-Nuaimi N, Patel S, Foschi F, Mannocci F. The detection of simulated periapical lesions in human dry mandibles with cone beam computed tomography—a dose reduction study. Int Endod J. 2016;49:1095–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12565.PubMed

40.

Alabdeen EHZ. Accuracy of half-exposure time in cone-beam computed tomography imaging for the detection of surface osseous changes in the temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol. 2017:33;124–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0256-6.

41.

Watanabe H, Wagatsuma T, Nomura Y, Honda E, Kurabayashi T. Spatial resolution of FineCube, a newly developed cone-beam computed tomography system. Oral Radiol. 2010;26:56–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0032-y.

42.

Ball RL, Barbizam JV, Cohenca N. Intraoperative endodontic applications of cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2013;39:548–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.038.PubMed

43.

Bechara B, McMahan CA, Noujeim M, Faddoul T, Moore WS, Teixeira FB, et al. Comparison of cone beam CT scans with enhanced photostimulated phosphor plate images in the detection of root fracture of endodontically treated teeth. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120404. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120404.PubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Vizzotto MB, Silveira PF, Arús NA, Montagner F, Gomes BP, da Silveira HE. CBCT for the assessment of second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in maxillary molar teeth: effect of voxel size and presence of root filling. Int Endod J. 2013;46:870–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12075.PubMed

45.

Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45:263–5. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2015.45.4.263.PubMedPubMedCentral

46.

European Commission. Radiation protection No 172. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology (Evidence based guidelines). Luxembourg: European Commission Directorate-General for Energy; 2012. [Updated 2014 Feb 24]. http://www.sedentexct.eu/files/radiation_protection_172.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2016

47.

Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:219–26.PubMed

48.

Okano T, Harata Y, Sugihara Y, Sakaino R, Tsuchida R, Iwai K, et al. Absorbed and effective doses from cone beam volumetric imaging for implant planning. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/14769929.PubMed

49.

Kawai T, Asaumi R, Sato I, Kumazawa Y, Yosue T. Observation of the retromolar foramen and canal of the mandible: a CBCT and macroscopic study. Oral Radiol. 2012;28:10–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-011-0074-9.

50.

Kawai T, Asaumi R, Sato I, Yoshida S, Yosue T. Classification of the lingual foramina and their bony canals in the median region of the mandible: cone beam computed tomography observations of dry Japanese mandibles. Oral Radiol. 2007;23:42–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-007-0064-0.

51.

Naitoh M, Nakahara K, Suenaga Y, Gotoh K, Kondo S, Ariji E. Variations of the bony canal in the mandibular ramus using cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2010;26:36–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0030-0.

52.

Kajan ZD, Salari A. Presence and course of the mandibular incisive canal and presence of the anterior loop in cone beam computed tomography images of an Iranian population. Oral Radiol. 2012;28:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0084-2.

53.

Tanaka R, Hayashi T, Ohshima H, Ida-Yonemochi H, Kenmotsu S, Ike M. CT anatomy of the anterior superior alveolar nerve canal: a macroscopic and microscopic study. Oral Radiol. 2011;27:93–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-011-0067-8.

54.

Matsumoto K, Araki M, Honda K. Bilateral absence of the mental foramen detected by cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2013;29:198–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0117-x.

55.

Asaumi R, Kawai T, Sato I, Yoshida S, Yosue T. Three-dimensional observations of the incisive canal and the surrounding bone using cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2010;26:20–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-010-0039-4.

56.

Salinas-Goodier C, Manchón Á, Rojo R, Coquerelle M, Sammartino G, Prados-Frutos JC. Prevalence and location of accessory foramina in the human mandible. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:72–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0212-x.

57.

Castro MAA, Vich MOL, Abreu MHG, Mesquita RV. Case–control study of mandibular canal branching and tooth-related inflammatory lesions. Oral Radiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0305-9.

58.

American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143:899–902.

59.

Health Protection Agency. Guidance on the safe use of dental cone beam CT (computed tomography) equipment. HPA-CRCE-010. Chilton: Health Protection Agency; 2010.

60.

White SC, Scarfe WC, Schulze RK, Lurie AG, Douglass JM, Farman AG, et al. The Image Gently in Dentistry campaign: promotion of responsible use of maxillofacial radiology in dentistry for children. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014;118:257–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2014.06.001.PubMed

61.

Araki M, Hashimoto K, Kawashima S, Matsumoto K, Akiyama Y. Radiographic features of enostosis determined with limited cone-beam computed tomography in comparison with rotational panoramic radiography. Oral Radiol. 2006;22:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-006-0044-9.

62.

Sezgin ÖS, Kayipmaz S. Trifid mandibular condyle. Oral Radiol. 2009;25:146–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0023-z.

63.

Ono M, Shimizu O, Ueda K, Hashimoto J, Shiratsuchi H, Yonehara Y, et al. A case of true concrescence diagnosed with cone-beam CT and in vivo micro-CT. Oral Radiol. 2010;26:106–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-010-0043-8.

64.

Metzler P, Zemann W, Lübbers H-T, Guggenberger R, Lüssi A, Obwegeser JA, et al. Bone mineral density measurements performed by cone-beam computed tomography in the bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis-affected jaw. Oral Radiol. 2012;28:101–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0093-1.

65.

Alkhader M, Al-Sadhan R, Al-Shawaf R. Cone-beam computed tomography findings of temporomandibular joints with osseous abnormalities. Oral Radiol. 2012;28:82–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0094-0.

66.

Matsumoto K, Sawada K, Kameoka S, Yonehara Y, Honda K. Cone-beam computed tomography for the diagnosis of mandibular condylar fractures: 11 case reports. Oral Radiol. 2013;29:80–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0100-6.

67.

Ertas ET, Atýcý MY, Kalabalýk F, Ince O. An unusual case of double idiopathic ramus-related Stafne bone cavity. Oral Radiol. 2013;29:193–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0121-1.

68.

Chen C-H, Wang C-K, Lin L-M, Huang Y-D, Geist JR, Chen Y-K. Retrospective comparison of the frequency, distribution, and radiographic features of osteosclerosis of the jaws between Taiwanese and American cohorts using cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:53–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0139-z.

69.

Mochizuki N, Sugino N, Ninomiya T, Yoshinari N, Udagawa N, Taguchi A. Association of cortical shape of the mandible on panoramic radiographs with mandibular trabecular bone structure in Japanese adults: a cone-beam CT-image analysis. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:160–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0155-z.

70.

Çaǧayan F, Sümbüllü MA, Akgül HM. Associations between the articular eminence inclination and condylar bone changes, condylar movements, and condyle and fossa shapes. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:84–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0149-x.

71.

Sekerci AE, Sisman Y. Bilateral anterior Stafne bone defect mimicking radicular cyst: report of a rare case with a review of the literature. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:115–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0133-5.

72.

Cura N, Hanttash A, Inceoglu B, Orhan K, Mine A, Oncul T. Dentigerous cysts in four quadrants of a nonsyndromic patient: case report and literature review. Oral Radiol. 2015;31:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-014-0171-7.

73.

Demirtas O, Harorli A. Evaluation of the maxillary third molar position and its relationship with the maxillary sinus: a CBCT study. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:173–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0228-2.

74.

Loncarevic S, Brajkovic D, Vukomanovic-Djurdjevic B, Kanjevac T, Vasovic M. Evaluation of the maxillary third molar position and its relationship with the maxillary sinus: a CBCT study. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:136–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0223-7.

75.

Kasikcioglu A, Gulsahi A. Relationship between maxillary sinus pathologies and maxillary posterior tooth periapical pathologies. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:180–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0231-7.

76.

Al-Ekrish AA. Alorainy IA. Apparent discontinuity of the roof of the glenoid fossa on cone-beam computed tomography images of an asymptomatic temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:9–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0207-7.

77.

Pinares J, Urzúa R. Proposed radiographic protocol for central superior mandibular condyle dislocation into the middle cranial fossa: apropos of a case. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:191–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0229-1.

78.

Çkur B, Bayrakdar IS. No proven correlations between bone quality and degenerative bone changes in the mandibular condyle and articular eminence in temporomandibular joint dysfunction. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:33–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0206-8.

79.

Avsever H, Gunduz K, Karakoç O, Akyol M, Orhan K. Incidental findings on cone-beam computed tomographic images: paranasal sinus findings and nasal septum variations. Oral Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0283-y.

80.

Liu Y, Xiao Y, Wang H, Hu D, Han X. Clinical and radiological analysis of osteochondromas of the mandible using cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2017;33:8–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0238-8.

81.

Delantoni A, Lyroudia K, Rafailidis V, Chryssogonidis I. Pseudohypoparathyroidism diagnosed in adulthood: maxillofacial clinical and radiographic findings. Oral Radiol. 2017;33:153–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0254-8.

82.

Yasa Y, Akgül HM. Comparative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of the osseous morphology of the temporomandibular joint in temporomandibular dysfunction patients and asymptomatic individuals. Oral Radiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0279-7.

83.

Yildirim E, Ciftci ME, Kamak G, Aktan AM. Evaluation of the relationship between maxillary sinus floor position and maxillary sinusitis using cone beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2017;33:16–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0241-0.

84.

Carrafiello G, Dizonno M, Colli V, Strocchi S, Pozzi Taubert S, Leonardi A, et al. Comparative study of jaws with multislice computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography. Radiol Med. 2010;115:600–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0520-5.PubMed

85.

Gulsahi A, Ates U, Tirali RE, Cehreli SB. Use of cone-beam computed tomography in diagnosis of an otherwise undetected periapical lesion in an anomalous tooth. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:111–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0130-8.

86.

Pedemonte E, Cabrera C, Torres A, Jacobs R, Harnisch A, Ramírez V, et al. Root and canal morphology of mandibular premolars using cone-beam computed tomography in a Chilean and Belgian subpopulation: a cross-sectional study. Oral Radiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0297-5.

87.

Dillenseger J-P, Gros C-I, Sayeh A, Rasamimanana J, Lawniczak F, Leminor J-M, et al. Image quality evaluation of small FOV and large FOV CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46:20160285. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160285.PubMed

88.

Elkhateeb SM, Torgersen GR, Arnout EA. Image quality assessment of clinically-applied CBCT protocols using a QAT phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016;44:20150078. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150078.

89.

Neves FS, Freitas DQ, Campos PS, Ekestubbe A, Lofthag-Hansen S. Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of vertical root fractures: the influence of imaging modes and root canal materials. J Endod. 2014;40:1530–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.012.PubMed

90.

Goren AD, Prins RD, Dauer LT, Quinn B, Al-Najjar A, Faber RD, et al. Effect of leaded glasses and thyroid shielding on cone beam CT radiation dose in an adult female phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120260. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120260.PubMedPubMedCentral

91.

Hidalgo A, Davies J, Horner K, Theodorakou C. Effectiveness of thyroid gland shielding in dental CBCT using a paediatric anthropomorphic phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140285. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140285.PubMed

92.

Lopes IA, Tucunduva RMA, Handem RH, Capelozza ALA. Study of the frequency and location of incidental findings of the maxillofacial region in different fields of view in CBCT scans. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46:20160215. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160215.PubMed

93.

Matzen LH, Wenzel A. Efficacy of CBCT for assessment of impacted mandibular third molars: a review—based on a hierarchical model of evidence. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140189. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140189.PubMed

94.

Şekerci AE, Şişman Y. Comparison between panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography findings for assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:170–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0158-9.

95.

Neves FS, Pontual AA, Campos PSF, Frazão MAG, de Almeida SM, Ramos-Perez FMM. Radicular dens invaginatus in a mandibular premolar: cone-beam computed tomography findings of a rare anomaly. Oral Radiol. 2013;29:70–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0101-5.

96.

Różyło TK, Różyło-Kalinowska I, Piskórz M. Cone-beam computed tomography for assessment of dens invaginatus in the Polish population. Oral Radiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0295-7.PubMedPubMedCentral

97.

Mirmohammadi H, Mahdi L, Partovi P, Khademi A, Shemesh H, Hassan B. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography in the detection of a second mesiobuccal root canal in endodontically treated teeth: an ex vivo study. J Endod. 2015;41:1678–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.011.PubMed

98.

Gunduz K, Avsever H, Orhan K, Çelenk P, Ozmen B, Cicek R, et al. Comparison of intraoral radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the detection of vertical root fractures: an in vitro study. Oral Radiol. 2013;29:6–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-012-0098-9.

99.

Iikubo M, Kamio T, Hashimoto N, Nishioka T, Wakoh M, Sano T, et al. Comparison of bisecting and parallel intraoral radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for detecting various horizontal angle root fractures. Oral Radiol. 2015;31:173–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0201-0.

100.

Larheim TA, Abrahamsson A-K, Kristensen M, Arvidsson LZ. CBCT special issue: review article. Temporomandibular joint diagnostics using CBCT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140235. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140235.PubMed

101.

Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM. Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140:e25–e30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.012.PubMed

102.

Suter VG, Sendi P, Reichart PA, Bornstein MM. The nasopalatine duct cyst: an analysis of the relation between clinical symptoms, cyst dimensions, and involvement of neighboring anatomical structures using cone beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69:2595–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.11.032.PubMed

103.

Dawood A, Brown J, Sauret-Jackson V, Purkayastha S. Optimization of cone beam CT exposure for pre-surgical evaluation of the implant site. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41:70–4. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/16421849.PubMedPubMedCentral

104.

Bornstein MM, Scarfe WC, Vaughn VM, Jacobs R. Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: a systematic review focusing on guidelines, indications, and radiation dose risks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:55–77. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.4.PubMed

105.

Gupta J, Ali SP. Cone beam computed tomography in oral implants. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2013;4:2–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-5950.117811.PubMedPubMedCentral

106.

Orhan K, Icen M, Aksoy S, Ozan O, Berberoglu A. Cone-beam CT evaluation of morphology, location, and course of mandibular incisive canal: considerations for implant treatment. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:64–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0138-0.

107.

Landin M, Jadhav A, Yadav S, Tadinada A. A comparative study between currently used methods and small volume-cone beam tomography for surgical placement of mini implants. Angle Orthod. 2015;85:446–53. https://doi.org/10.2319/042214-298.1.PubMed

108.

Ambu E, Fimiani M, Vigna M, Grandini S. Use of bioactive materials and limited FOV CBCT in the treatment of a replanted permanent tooth affected by inflammatory external root resorption: a case report. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2017;18:51–5. https://doi.org/10.23804/ejpd.2017.18.01.11.PubMed

109.

Honda K, Larheim TA, Johannessen S, Arai Y, Shinoda K, Westesson PL. Ortho cubic super-high resolution computed tomography: a new radiographic technique with application to the temporomandibular joint. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001;91:239–43.PubMed

110.

Honda K, Matumoto K, Kashima M, Takano Y, Kawashima S, Arai Y. Single air contrast arthrography for temporomandibular joint disorder using limited cone beam computed tomography for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:271–3. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/50972902.PubMed

111.

Dalessandri D, Laffranchi L, Tonni I, Zotti F, Piancino MG, Paganelli C, et al. Advantages of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the orthodontic treatment planning of cleidocranial dysplasia patients: a case report. Head Face Med. 2011;7:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-7-6.PubMedPubMedCentral

112.

Kapila SD, Nervina JM. CBCT special issue: review article. CBCT in orthodontics: assessment of treatment outcomes and indications for its use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:0140282. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140282.

113.

Suomalainen A, Åberg T, Rautio J, Hurmerinta K. Cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of alveolar bone grafting in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod. 2014;36:603–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt105.PubMed

114.

Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM. Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:291–4. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/25500850.PubMed

115.

Kajan ZD, Asli HN, Taramsari M, Chai SMF, Hemmaty YB. Comparison of height and width measurements of mandibular bone in various head orientations using cone beam computed tomography: an experimental in vitro study. Oral Radiol. 2015;31:28–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-014-0179-z.

116.

Bohner LOL, Tortamano P, Marotti J. Accuracy of linear measurements around dental implants by means of cone beam computed tomography with different exposure parameters. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46:20160377. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160377.PubMedPubMedCentral

117.

Ghoneima A, Imburgia A, Halum S, Van Dis M, Kula K. Three-dimensional airway analysis of trumpet players vs. non-trumpet players. Oral Radiol. 2015;31:105–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-014-0187-z.

118.

Bin F, Meng Y, Meng J, Hu W. Comparison of velum morphologies using cephalometry and dental CBCT. Oral Radiol. 2016;32:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-015-0200-1.

119.

Alsufyani NA, Noga ML, Witmans M, Major PW. Upper airway imaging in sleep-disordered breathing: role of cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2017;33:161–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0280-1.

120.

Sutthiprapaporn P, Tanimoto K, Ohtsuka M, Nagasaki T, Konishi M, Iida Y, et al. Improved inspection of the lateral pharyngeal recess using cone-beam computed tomography in the upright position. Oral Radiol. 2008;24:71–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-008-0078-2.

121.

International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiological Protection in Medicine. ICRP Publication 105. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(6).

122.

Berrington de González A, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet. 2004;363:345–51.PubMed

123.

Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z, Butler MW, Goergen SK, Byrnes GB, et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ. 2013;346:f2360.PubMedPubMedCentral

124.

OECD. Health at a Glance 2015: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2015.

125.

Sezgin ÖS, Kayipmaz S, Yasar D, Yilmaz AB, Ozturk MH. Comparative dosimetry of dental cone beam computed tomography, panoramic radiography, and multislice computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2008;28:32–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-011-0078-5.

126.

Kanzaki T, Takahashi Y, Yarita K. Absorbed dose to the eye lens during dental radiography. Oral Radiol. 2017;33:246–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0267-3.

127.

Neves FS, Souza TC, de-Azevedo-Vaz SL, Campos PSF, Bóscolo FN. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography milliamperage settings on image quality of the mandibular third molar region. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:27–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0132-6.

Titel: Clinical guidelines for dental cone-beam computed tomography
verfasst von: Takafumi Hayashi
Yoshinori Arai
Toru Chikui
Sachiko Hayashi-Sakai
Kazuya Honda
Hiroko Indo
Taisuke Kawai
Kaoru Kobayashi
Shumei Murakami
Masako Nagasawa
Munetaka Naitoh
Eiji Nakayama
Yutaka Nikkuni
Hideyoshi Nishiyama
Noriaki Shoji
Shigeaki Suenaga
Ray Tanaka
A Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines
Japanese Society for Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
Publikationsdatum: 11.01.2018
Verlag: Springer Singapore
Erschienen in: Oral Radiology / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0911-6028
Elektronische ISSN: 1613-9674
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-018-0314-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Clinical guidelines for dental cone-beam computed tomography

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2018

Acknowledgment to reviewers 2017

Root and canal morphology of mandibular premolars using cone-beam computed tomography in a Chilean and Belgian subpopulation: a cross-sectional study

Gorham’s disease of the mandible: radiological features

Current status of oral and maxillofacial radiology in West Africa

Craniofacial cephalometric morphologies in different cleft types: a retrospective cross-sectional study of 212 patients

Correction to: Comparative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of the osseous morphology of the temporomandibular joint in temporomandibular dysfunction patients and asymptomatic individuals

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter