Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2024
Influence of exposure protocol, voxel size, and artifact removal algorithm on the trueness of segmentation utilizing an artificial-intelligence-based system.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alrashed Safa, Dutra Vinicius, Chu Tien-Min G, Yang Chao-Chieh, Lin Wei-Shao
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of exposure protocol, voxel sizes, and artifact removal algorithms on the trueness of segmentation in various mandible regions using an artificial intelligence (AI)-based system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven dry human mandibles were scanned using a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scanner under differing exposure protocols (standard and ultra-low), voxel sizes (0.15 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.45 mm), and with or without artifact removal algorithm. The resulting datasets were segmented using an AI-based system, exported as 3D models, and compared to reference files derived from a white-light laboratory scanner. Deviation measurement was performed using a computer-aided design (CAD) program and recorded as root mean square (RMS). The RMS values were used as a representation of the trueness of the AI-segmented 3D models. A 4-way ANOVA was used to assess the impact of voxel size, exposure protocol, artifact removal algorithm, and location on RMS values (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Significant effects were found with voxel size (p < 0.001) and location (p < 0.001), but not with exposure protocol (p = 0.259) or artifact removal algorithm (p = 0.752). Standard exposure groups had significantly lower RMS values than the ultra-low exposure groups in the mandible body with 0.3 mm (p = 0.014) or 0.45 mm (p < 0.001) voxel sizes, the symphysis with a 0.45 mm voxel size (p = 0.011), and the whole mandible with a 0.45 mm voxel size (p = 0.001). Exposure protocol did not affect RMS values at teeth and alveolar bone (p = 0.544), mandible angles (p = 0.380), condyles (p = 0.114), and coronoids (p = 0.806) locations.
CONCLUSION: This study informs optimal exposure protocol and voxel size choices in CBCT imaging for true AI-based automatic segmentation with minimal radiation. The artifact removal algorithm did not influence the trueness of AI segmentation. When using an ultra-low exposure protocol to minimize patient radiation exposure in AI segmentations, a voxel size of 0.15 mm is recommended, while a voxel size of 0.45 mm should be avoided.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven dry human mandibles were scanned using a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scanner under differing exposure protocols (standard and ultra-low), voxel sizes (0.15 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.45 mm), and with or without artifact removal algorithm. The resulting datasets were segmented using an AI-based system, exported as 3D models, and compared to reference files derived from a white-light laboratory scanner. Deviation measurement was performed using a computer-aided design (CAD) program and recorded as root mean square (RMS). The RMS values were used as a representation of the trueness of the AI-segmented 3D models. A 4-way ANOVA was used to assess the impact of voxel size, exposure protocol, artifact removal algorithm, and location on RMS values (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Significant effects were found with voxel size (p < 0.001) and location (p < 0.001), but not with exposure protocol (p = 0.259) or artifact removal algorithm (p = 0.752). Standard exposure groups had significantly lower RMS values than the ultra-low exposure groups in the mandible body with 0.3 mm (p = 0.014) or 0.45 mm (p < 0.001) voxel sizes, the symphysis with a 0.45 mm voxel size (p = 0.011), and the whole mandible with a 0.45 mm voxel size (p = 0.001). Exposure protocol did not affect RMS values at teeth and alveolar bone (p = 0.544), mandible angles (p = 0.380), condyles (p = 0.114), and coronoids (p = 0.806) locations.
CONCLUSION: This study informs optimal exposure protocol and voxel size choices in CBCT imaging for true AI-based automatic segmentation with minimal radiation. The artifact removal algorithm did not influence the trueness of AI segmentation. When using an ultra-low exposure protocol to minimize patient radiation exposure in AI segmentations, a voxel size of 0.15 mm is recommended, while a voxel size of 0.45 mm should be avoided.