The Influence of Alteration of kVp and mAs towards the Image Quality of Acrylic Using CBCT

Abstract:

CBCT is a modernized technology in producing radiograph image on dentistry. The image quality excellence is very important for clinicians to interpret the image, so the result of diagnosis produced becoming more accurate, appropriate, thus minimizing the working time. This research was aimed to assess the image quality using the blank acrylic phantom polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) (C­₅H₈O₂)_n in the density of 1.185 g/cm³ for evaluating the homogeneity and uniformity of the image produced. Acrylic phantom was supported with a tripod and laid down on the chin rest of the CBCT device, then the phantom was fixed, and the edge of the phantom was touched by the bite block. Furthermore, the exposure of the X-ray was executed toward the acrylic phantom with various kVp and mAs, from 80 until 90, with the range of 5 kV and the variation of mA was 3, 5, and 7 mA respectively. The time exposure was kept constant for 25 seconds. The samples were taken from CBCT acrylic images, then as much as 5 ROIs (Region of Interest) was chosen to be analyzed. The ROIs determination was analyzed by using the ImageJ® software for recognizing the influence of kVp and mAs towards the image uniformity, noise and SNR. The lowest kVp and mAs had the result of uniformity value, homogeneity and signal to noise ratio of 11.22; 40.35; and 5.96 respectively. Meanwhile, the highest kVp and mAs had uniformity value, homogeneity and signal to noise ratio of 16.96; 26.20; and 5.95 respectively. There were significant differences between the image uniformity and homogeneity on the lowest kVp and mAs compared to the highest kVp and mAs, as analyzed with the ANOVA statistics analysis continued with the t-student post-hoc test with α = 0.05. However, there was no significant difference in SNR as analyzed with the ANOVA statistic analysis. The usage of the higher kVp and mAs caused the improvement of the image homogeneity and uniformity compared to the lower kVp and mAs.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 829)
• Pages: 252-257
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.829.252
• Online since: December 2019
• Authors: Azhari Azhari*, Yohanes Hutasoit, Freddy Haryanto
• Keywords: CBCT, Noise, Polymethylmethacrylate Phantom, SNR, Uniformity

References

[1] de Oliveira MV, Wenzel A, Campos PS, Spin-Neto R. Quality assurance phantoms for cone beam computed tomography: a systematic literature review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 46 (2017) 52-60.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160329

[2] Lopes IA, Tucunduva RM, Handem RH, Capelozza AL. Study of the frequency and location of incidental findings of the maxillofacial region in different fields of view in CBCT scans. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 46 (2017) 1-10.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160215

[3] Elkhateeb SM, Torgersen GR, Arnout EA. Image quality assessment of clinically-applied CBCT protocols using a QAT phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 45(2016)6-16.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160075

[4] Queiroz PM, Santaella GM, da Paz TD, Freitas DQ. Evaluation of a metal artifact reduction tool on different positions of metal object in the FOV. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 46 (2017) 3-12.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160366

[5] Papakosta TK, Savva AD, Economopoulos TL, Matsopoulos GK, Gröhndal HG. An automatic panoramic image reconstruction scheme from dental computed tomography images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 46 (2017) 1-14.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160225

[6] Suphanantachat S, Tantikul K, Tamsailom S, Kosalagood P, Nisapakultorn K, Tavedhikul K. Comparison of clinical values between cone beam computed tomography and conventional intraoral radiography in periodontal and infrabony defect assessment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 6 (2017) 7-17.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160461

[7] Koivisto J, van Eijnatten M, Järnstedt J, Holli-Helenius K, Dastidar P, Wolff J. Impact of prone, supine and oblique patient positioning on CBCT image quality, contrast-to-noise ratio and figure of merit value in the maxillofacial region. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 71 (2017) 6-16.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160418

[8] Jasa GR, Shimizu M, Okamura K, Tokumori K, Takeshita Y, Weerawanich W, et al. Effects of exposure parameters and slice thickness on detecting clear and unclear mandibular canals using cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 48 (2017) 4-13.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160315

[9] England GM, Moon ES, Roth J, Deguchi T, Firestone AR, Beck FM, et al. Conditions and calibration to obtain comparable grey values between different clinical cone beam computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 45 (2017) 2-11.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160322

[10] Dau M, Edalatpour A, Schulze R, Al-Nawas B, Abdulmonem A, Kämmerer PW. Presurgical evaluation of bony implant sites using panoramic radiography and cone bone tomography-influence of medical education. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 50 (2017) 6-16.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160081

[11] White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology Principle and Interpretation. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Elsevier; (2014).

[12] Widmann G, Bischel A, Stratis A, Bosmans H, Jacobs R, Gassner EM, et al. Spatial and contrast resolution of ultralow dose dentomaxillofacial CT imaging using iterative reconstruction technology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 45(2017) 4-14.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160452

[13] Spin-Neto R, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Detection of patient movement during CBCT examination using video observation compared with an accelerator-gyroscope tracking system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 45 (2017) 2-12.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160289

[14] Bamba J, Araki K, Endo A, Okano T. Image quality assessment of three cone beam CT machines using the SEDENTEXCT CT phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 42 (2013) 8-17.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20120445

[15] Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, Motroni A, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Reliability of voxel gray value in CBCT for preoperative implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 27 (2012) 6-16.

[16] Pauwels R, Jacobs R, Singer SR, Mupparapu M. CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 44 (2015) 1-11.

DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140238