Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models
| Autor(a) principal: | |
|---|---|
| Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
| Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
| Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
| Idioma: | eng |
| Título da fonte: | Research, Society and Development |
| Texto Completo: | https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/9842 |
Resumo: | This study compared the acquisition protocols of the Conical Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) system, to assess the influence on image accuracy by different voxel sizes and the presence of soft tissue. Tomographic acquisition was performed in a fresh (F) and dry (D) pork jaw with voxel sizes of 0.4, 0.3 and 0.25 mm. The gold standard was obtained by scanning dry jaws covered with barium sulfate with a voxel size of 0.25 mm. The images were treated in the MIMICS® program, and noise areas were removed manually, using a fixed threshold for the purpose of generating 3D printing windows. Each window was virtually overlaid with the gold standard using the MeshLab software, obtaining absolute error values between the meshes, generating a map of discrepancies. Significant differences were found between windows D 0.30 vs. F 0.30, D 0.30 vs. F 0.25, D 0.30 vs. D 0.25, D 0.30 vs. F 0.40, F 0.30 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.40, D 0.25 vs. F 0.40, D 0.25 vs. D 0.40 and F 0.40 vs. D 0.40, (p <0.05). It was observed that the dry jaw windows showed a lower mean and standard deviation when compared to the fresh jaw windows. The 0.25 mm voxel protocol showed the most accurate result and the presence of soft tissues influenced the accuracy of the image when some protocols were compared statistically. |
| id |
UNIFEI_70e0638f742c57059b8fbd9058d6474f |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/9842 |
| network_acronym_str |
UNIFEI |
| network_name_str |
Research, Society and Development |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping modelsEvaluación de la precisión de diferentes protocolos de adquisición CBCT utilizados en modelos de creación rápida de prototiposAvaliação da precisão de diferentes protocolos de aquisição de TCFC usados em modelos de prototipagem rápidaCreación rápida de prototiposTomógrafo computarizado de haz cónicoTamaño de voxelSimulación de tejidos blandos.Prototipagem rápidaTomógrafo computadorizado de feixe cônicoTamanho do voxelSimulação de tecido mole.Rapid prototypingCone beam computed tomographVoxel sizeSoft tissue simulation.This study compared the acquisition protocols of the Conical Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) system, to assess the influence on image accuracy by different voxel sizes and the presence of soft tissue. Tomographic acquisition was performed in a fresh (F) and dry (D) pork jaw with voxel sizes of 0.4, 0.3 and 0.25 mm. The gold standard was obtained by scanning dry jaws covered with barium sulfate with a voxel size of 0.25 mm. The images were treated in the MIMICS® program, and noise areas were removed manually, using a fixed threshold for the purpose of generating 3D printing windows. Each window was virtually overlaid with the gold standard using the MeshLab software, obtaining absolute error values between the meshes, generating a map of discrepancies. Significant differences were found between windows D 0.30 vs. F 0.30, D 0.30 vs. F 0.25, D 0.30 vs. D 0.25, D 0.30 vs. F 0.40, F 0.30 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.40, D 0.25 vs. F 0.40, D 0.25 vs. D 0.40 and F 0.40 vs. D 0.40, (p <0.05). It was observed that the dry jaw windows showed a lower mean and standard deviation when compared to the fresh jaw windows. The 0.25 mm voxel protocol showed the most accurate result and the presence of soft tissues influenced the accuracy of the image when some protocols were compared statistically.Este estudio comparó los protocolos de adquisición del sistema de tomografía computarizada de haz cónico (TCHC), para evaluar la influencia en la precisión de la imagen por diferentes tamaños de voxel y la presencia de tejido blando. La adquisición tomográfica se realizó en mandíbula de cerdo fresca (F) y seca (D) con voxel de tamaños 0,4, 0,3 y 0,25 mm. El patrón oro se obtuvo escaneando mandíbulas secas cubiertas con sulfato de bario con tamaño de vóxel de 0,25 mm. Las imágenes se trataron en el programa MIMICS®, las áreas de ruido se eliminaron manualmente, utilizando un umbral fijo con el fin de generar ventanas de impresión 3D. Cada ventana se superpuso virtualmente con el estándar de oro utilizando software MeshLab, obteniendo valores absolutos de error entre las mallas, generando un mapa de discrepancias. Se encontraron diferencias significativas entre ventanas D 0,30 vs. F 0,30, D 0,30 vs. F 0,25, D 0,30 vs. D 0,25, D 0,30 vs. F 0,40, F 0,30 vs. D 0,25, F 0,25 vs. D 0,25, F 0,25 vs. D 0,40, D 0,25 vs. F 0,40, D 0,25 vs. D 0,40 y F 0,40 vs. D 0,40, (p <0,05). Se observó que las ventanas de mandíbula seca mostraron una desviación media y estándar más baja en comparación con ventanas de la mandíbula fresca. El protocolo de vóxel de 0,25 mm mostró el resultado más preciso y la presencia de tejidos blandos influyó en la precisión de la imagen cuando se compararon estadísticamente algunos protocolos.Este estudo comparou os protocolos de aquisição do sistema de Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico (TCFC), para avaliar a influência na precisão da imagem por diferentes tamanhos de voxel e presença de tecido mole. A aquisição tomográfica foi realizada em mandíbula de porco nos estados fresco (F) e seco (D) com tamanhos de voxels de 0,4, 0,3 e 0,25 mm. O padrão ouro foi obtido pela varredura de mandíbula seca coberta com sulfato de bário com tamanho de voxel de 0,25 mm. As imagens foram tratadas no programa MIMICS®, e áreas de ruído foram removidas manualmente, utilizando limiar fixo para fins de geração de janelas de impressão 3D. Cada janela foi sobreposta virtualmente ao padrão ouro por meio do software MeshLab, obtendo-se valores de erros absolutos entre as malhas, gerando um mapa de discrepâncias. Foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre as janelas D 0,30 vs. F 0,30, D 0,30 vs. F 0,25, D 0,30 vs. D 0,25, D 0,30 vs. F 0,40, F 0,30 vs. D 0,25, F 0,25 vs. D 0,25, F 0,25 vs. D 0,40, D 0,25 vs. F 0,40, D 0,25 vs. D 0,40 e F 0,40 vs. D 0,40, (p <0,05). Observou-se que as janelas de mandíbula seca apresentaram menor média e desvio padrão dos quando comparadas às janelas de mandíbula frescas. O protocolo com voxel de 0,25 mm apresentou o resultado mais acurado e a presença de tecidos moles influenciou na acurácia da imagem quando alguns protocolos foram comparados estatisticamente.Research, Society and Development2020-11-13info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/984210.33448/rsd-v9i11.9842Research, Society and Development; Vol. 9 No. 11; e2649119842Research, Society and Development; Vol. 9 Núm. 11; e2649119842Research, Society and Development; v. 9 n. 11; e26491198422525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIenghttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/9842/8763Copyright (c) 2020 Paola Fernanda Leal Corazza; Fernando Martins Baeder; Daniel Furtado Silva; Ana Carolina Lyra de Albuquerque; Jorge Vicente Lopes Silva; José Luiz Cintra Junqueira; Francine Kühl Panzarellahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCorazza, Paola Fernanda Leal Baeder, Fernando Martins Silva, Daniel FurtadoAlbuquerque, Ana Carolina Lyra deSilva, Jorge Vicente Lopes Junqueira, José Luiz CintraPanzarella, Francine Kühl2020-12-10T23:37:57Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/9842Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:32:01.826342Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models Evaluación de la precisión de diferentes protocolos de adquisición CBCT utilizados en modelos de creación rápida de prototipos Avaliação da precisão de diferentes protocolos de aquisição de TCFC usados em modelos de prototipagem rápida |
| title |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| spellingShingle |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models Corazza, Paola Fernanda Leal Creación rápida de prototipos Tomógrafo computarizado de haz cónico Tamaño de voxel Simulación de tejidos blandos. Prototipagem rápida Tomógrafo computadorizado de feixe cônico Tamanho do voxel Simulação de tecido mole. Rapid prototyping Cone beam computed tomograph Voxel size Soft tissue simulation. |
| title_short |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| title_full |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| title_fullStr |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| title_sort |
Accuracy assessment of different CBCT acquisition protocols used in rapid prototyping models |
| author |
Corazza, Paola Fernanda Leal |
| author_facet |
Corazza, Paola Fernanda Leal Baeder, Fernando Martins Silva, Daniel Furtado Albuquerque, Ana Carolina Lyra de Silva, Jorge Vicente Lopes Junqueira, José Luiz Cintra Panzarella, Francine Kühl |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Baeder, Fernando Martins Silva, Daniel Furtado Albuquerque, Ana Carolina Lyra de Silva, Jorge Vicente Lopes Junqueira, José Luiz Cintra Panzarella, Francine Kühl |
| author2_role |
author author author author author author |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Corazza, Paola Fernanda Leal Baeder, Fernando Martins Silva, Daniel Furtado Albuquerque, Ana Carolina Lyra de Silva, Jorge Vicente Lopes Junqueira, José Luiz Cintra Panzarella, Francine Kühl |
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Creación rápida de prototipos Tomógrafo computarizado de haz cónico Tamaño de voxel Simulación de tejidos blandos. Prototipagem rápida Tomógrafo computadorizado de feixe cônico Tamanho do voxel Simulação de tecido mole. Rapid prototyping Cone beam computed tomograph Voxel size Soft tissue simulation. |
| topic |
Creación rápida de prototipos Tomógrafo computarizado de haz cónico Tamaño de voxel Simulación de tejidos blandos. Prototipagem rápida Tomógrafo computadorizado de feixe cônico Tamanho do voxel Simulação de tecido mole. Rapid prototyping Cone beam computed tomograph Voxel size Soft tissue simulation. |
| description |
This study compared the acquisition protocols of the Conical Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) system, to assess the influence on image accuracy by different voxel sizes and the presence of soft tissue. Tomographic acquisition was performed in a fresh (F) and dry (D) pork jaw with voxel sizes of 0.4, 0.3 and 0.25 mm. The gold standard was obtained by scanning dry jaws covered with barium sulfate with a voxel size of 0.25 mm. The images were treated in the MIMICS® program, and noise areas were removed manually, using a fixed threshold for the purpose of generating 3D printing windows. Each window was virtually overlaid with the gold standard using the MeshLab software, obtaining absolute error values between the meshes, generating a map of discrepancies. Significant differences were found between windows D 0.30 vs. F 0.30, D 0.30 vs. F 0.25, D 0.30 vs. D 0.25, D 0.30 vs. F 0.40, F 0.30 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.25, F 0.25 vs. D 0.40, D 0.25 vs. F 0.40, D 0.25 vs. D 0.40 and F 0.40 vs. D 0.40, (p <0.05). It was observed that the dry jaw windows showed a lower mean and standard deviation when compared to the fresh jaw windows. The 0.25 mm voxel protocol showed the most accurate result and the presence of soft tissues influenced the accuracy of the image when some protocols were compared statistically. |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-11-13 |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/9842 10.33448/rsd-v9i11.9842 |
| url |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/9842 |
| identifier_str_mv |
10.33448/rsd-v9i11.9842 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/9842/8763 |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 9 No. 11; e2649119842 Research, Society and Development; Vol. 9 Núm. 11; e2649119842 Research, Society and Development; v. 9 n. 11; e2649119842 2525-3409 reponame:Research, Society and Development instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) instacron:UNIFEI |
| instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
| instacron_str |
UNIFEI |
| institution |
UNIFEI |
| reponame_str |
Research, Society and Development |
| collection |
Research, Society and Development |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
rsd.articles@gmail.com |
| _version_ |
1797052663424090112 |