medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista ADM Órgano Oficial de la Asociación Dental Mexicana

ISSN 0001-0944 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de la Asociación Dental Mexicana
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
    • Send manuscript
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2023, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev ADM 2023; 80 (4)

Correction of the artifact produced in tomographic images in dental equipment.

Vázquez D, Subirán B, Pujol M, Estévez A, Nart L, Hecht P
Full text How to cite this article 10.35366/112309

DOI

DOI: 10.35366/112309
URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.35366/112309

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 204-208
PDF size: 225.58 Kb.


Key words:

tomography, dental implant, artifact, filter, CBCT (Cone Beam Computed Tomography).

ABSTRACT

Objective: to diminish the artifact effect generated by high density objects by using filters of different materials and thickness, located in strategic places of the tomograph. Material and methods: aluminum and copper filters located in strategic places in the tomographic equipment were used. Oblique cuts were made on dental pieces with metal restorations and implants; the extension of the artifact in width and height was measured in each tomographic acquisition. Results: significant differences were found regarding the decrease of the dispersion according to each filter with respect to the non-use of these elements. Conclusion: the use of filters achieves to diminish the artifact effect in structures of high density, obtaining a better image quality for the diagnosis, allowing the software to reconstruct a real image.


REFERENCES

  1. Sartori P, Rozowykniat M, Sivieroc L, Barba G, Pena A, Mayol N et al. Artefactos y artificios frecuentes en tomografía computada y resonancia magnética. Rev Argent Radiol. 2015; 79 (4): 192-204.

  2. Stadler A, Schima W, Ba-Ssalamah A, Kettenbach J, Eisenhuber E. Artifacts in body MR imaging: their appearance and how to eliminate them. Eur Radiol. 2007; 17 (5): 1242-1255.

  3. Al-Shakhrah I, Al-Obaidi T Common artifacts in computerized tomography: a review. Appl Radiol. 2003; 32: 25-32.

  4. Boas FE, Fleischmann D. CT artifacts: causes and reduction techniques. J Med Imaging. 2012; 4 (2): 229-240.

  5. Lisanti C, Carlin C, Banks KP, Wang D. Normal MRI appearance and motion-related phenomena of CSF. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 188 (3): 716-725.

  6. Zhuo J, Gullapalli RP. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: MR artifacts, safety, and quality control. Radiographics. 2006; 26 (1): 275-297.

  7. Barbieri Petrelli G, Flores Guillén J, Escribano Bermejo M, Discepoli N. Actualización en radiología dental: Radiología convencional Vs digital. Av Odontoestomatol. 2006; 22 (2): 131-139.

  8. Wenzel A, Kirkevang LL. High resolution charge-coupled device sensor vs. medium resolution photostimulable phosphor plate digital receptors for detection of root fractures in vitro. Dent Traumatol. 2005; 21 (1): 32-36.

  9. Zhang X, Wang J, Xing L. Metal artifact reduction in x-ray computed tomography (CT) by constrained optimization. Med Phys. 2011; 38 (2): 701-711.

  10. Berkhout WE, Beuger DA, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF. The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004; 33 (1): 1-5.




Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3

2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev ADM. 2023;80