Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of voxel size on image reconstruction in cone-beam computed tomography

  • Technical Report
  • Published:
Oral Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

This study evaluated the effects of changing the voxel size on the resolution and noise of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) reconstruction images.

Methods

The voxel sizes used for reconstruction were 160, 80, and 40 μm using prototype software for the Accuitomo F8 (J. Morita, Kyoto, Japan). The resolution was measured using a modulation transfer function (MTF), and CBCT images of a 1-mm-thick, 10-mm-diameter aluminum pipe set slightly inclined from the vertical were taken with a field of view of 8 cm. To measure the noise, a tomographic image of an 8-cm-diameter water phantom was taken and reconstructed at the three voxel sizes. The standard deviation (SD) of the noise was then determined.

Results

The MTF at 2 lp/mm was 0.05, 0.12, and 0.12 for voxel sizes of 160, 80, and 40 μm, respectively, and the SD of the noise was 10.0, 13.8, and 17.1% for the same respective voxel sizes.

Conclusions

The limit of resolution was determined to be the 80-μm voxel size. When the voxels were smaller, the noise increased.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  1. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Terakado M, Hashimoto K, Arai Y, Honda M, Sekiwa T, Sato H. Diagnostic imaging with newly developed ortho cubic super-high resolution computed tomography (Ortho-CT). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000;89:509–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hashimoto K, Arai Y, Iwai K, Kawashima S, Terakado M. A comparison of a new limited cone beam computed tomography machine for dental use with a multidetector row helical CT machine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003;95:371–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Honda K, Arai Y, Kashima M, Takano Y, Sawada K, Ejima K, et al. Evaluation of the usefulness of the limited cone-beam CT (3DX) in the assessment of the thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:391–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Araki M, Hashimoto K, Kawashima S, Matsumoto K, Akiyama Y. Radiographic features of enostosis determined with limited cone-beam computer tomography in comparison with rotational panoramic radiography. Oral Radiol. 2006;22:27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kagawa T, Fukunari F, Shiraishi T, Yamasaki M, Ichihara T, Kihara Y, et al. Development of a simple image designed for small x-ray field CT equipment 3DX. Oral Radiol. 2006;22:47–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sakabe J, Kuroki Y, Fujimaki S, Nakajima I, Honda K. Reproducibility and accuracy of measuring unerupted teeth using limited cone beam x-ray CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:2–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Suomalainen AK, Salo A, Robinson S, Peltola JS. The 3DX multi-image micro-CT device in clinical dental practice. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:80–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hirsch E, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Silva MAG. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Araki K, Maki K, Seki K, Sakamaki K, Harata Y, Sakaino R, et al. Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial x-ray cone beam CT scanner (CB MercuRay™): system configuration and physical properties. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:51–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Marmulla R, Wörtche R, Mühling J, Hassfeld S. Geometric accuracy of the NewTom 9000 cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2005;34:28–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Arnheiter C, Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Trends in maxillofacial cone-beam computed tomography usage. Oral Radiol. 2006;22:80–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bartling SH, Majdani O, Gupta R, Rodt T, Dullin C, Fitzgerald PF, et al. Large scan field, high spatial resolution flat-panel detector based volumetric CT of the whole human skull base and for maxillofacial imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:317–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stratemann SA, Huang JC, Maki K, Miller AJ, Hatcher DC. Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37:80–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stewart CB. Radiologic science for technologists: physics, biology, and protection. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Samei E, Ranger NT, Dobbins JT III, et al. Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function. Med Phys. 2006;33(5):1454–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Higashide R, Ichikawa K, Kunimoto H, Sagawa M. Proposal and verification of presampled MTF measurement by the simple analysis method using the edge method (in Japanese). Dent Radiol. 2008;64:417–25.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Berland L. Practical CT technology and techniques. New York: Raven Press; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  20. ICRP. ICRP publication 60: 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Annals of the ICRP, vol 21. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1991.

  21. Hayakawa Y, Farman AG, Kelly MS, Kuroyanagi K. Signal-to noise ratio: computed dental radiography versus Sens-A-Ray. Oral Radiol. 1995;11(2):109–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank J. Morita Corporation, Kyoto, Japan, for supporting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kitasenju Radist Dental Clinic i-VIEW Imaging Center, Koushin Building, 3-59 Senju, Adachi-ku, Tokyo, 120-0034, Japan

    Hideyuki Tanimoto & Yoshinori Arai

  2. Nihon University School of Dentistry, Tokyo, Japan

    Yoshinori Arai

Authors
  1. Hideyuki Tanimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoshinori Arai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideyuki Tanimoto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tanimoto, H., Arai, Y. The effect of voxel size on image reconstruction in cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol 25, 149–153 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0019-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-009-0019-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation