MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1259/dmfr.20230109

Медицинская библиотека · Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023

Filtered back projection vs. iterative reconstruction for CBCT: effects on image noise and processing time.

Ramage Amanda, Lopez Gutierrez Bryan, Fischer Kathleen, Sekula Michael, Santaella Gustavo Machado, Scarfe William, Brasil Danieli Moura, de Oliveira-Santos Christiano

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of standard filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) methods on CBCT image noise and processing time (PT), acquired with various acquisition parameters with and without metal artefact reduction (MAR).

METHODS

CBCT scans using the Midmark EIOS unit of a human mandible embedded in soft tissue equivalent material with and without the presence of an implant at mandibular first molar region were acquired at various acquisition settings (milliamperages [4mA-14mA], FOV [5 × 5, 6 × 8, 9 × 10 cm], and resolutions [low, standard, high] and reconstructed using standard FBP and IR, and with and without MAR. The processing time was recorded for each reconstruction. ImageJ was used to analyze specific axial images. Radial transaxial fiducial lines were created relative to the implant site. Standard deviations of the gray density values (image noise) were calculated at fixed distances on the fiducial lines on the buccal and lingual aspects at specific axial levels, and mean values for FBP and IR were compared using paired t-tests. Significance was defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The overall mean for image noise (± SD) for FBP was 198.65 ± 55.58 and 99.84 ± 16.28 for IR. IR significantly decreased image noise compared to FBP at all acquisition parameters (p < 0.05). Noise reduction among different scanning protocols ranged between 29.7% (5 × 5 cm FOV) and 58.1% (5mA). IR increased processing time by an average of 35.1 s.

CONCLUSIONS

IR significantly reduces CBCT image noise compared to standard FBP without substantially increasing processing time.

Для цитирования: Ramage Amanda, Lopez Gutierrez Bryan, Fischer Kathleen, Sekula Michael, Santaella Gustavo Machado, Scarfe William, Brasil Danieli Moura, de Oliveira-Santos Christiano. Filtered back projection vs. iterative reconstruction for CBCT: effects on image noise and processing time.. Dento maxillo facial radiology. 2023. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20230109.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.