Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics


Signorelli, Luca; Patcas, Raphael; Peltomäki, Timo; Schätzle, Marc (2016). Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics = Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopädie, 77(1):9-15.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine radiation doses of different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan modes in comparison to a conventional set of orthodontic radiographs (COR) by means of phantom dosimetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) chips (3 × 1 × 1 mm) were used on an adult male tissue-equivalent phantom to record the distribution of the absorbed radiation dose. Three different scanning modes (i.e., portrait, normal landscape, and fast scan landscape) were compared to CORs [i.e., conventional lateral (LC) and posteroanterior (PA) cephalograms and digital panoramic radiograph (OPG)]. RESULTS The following radiation levels were measured: 131.7, 91, and 77 μSv in the portrait, normal landscape, and fast landscape modes, respectively. The overall effective dose for a COR was 35.81 μSv (PA: 8.90 μSv; OPG: 21.87 μSv; LC: 5.03 μSv). DISCUSSION Although one CBCT scan may replace all CORs, one set of CORs still entails 2-4 times less radiation than one CBCT. Depending on the scan mode, the radiation dose of a CBCT is about 3-6 times an OPG, 8-14 times a PA, and 15-26 times a lateral LC. Finally, in order to fully reconstruct cephalograms including the cranial base and other important structures, the CBCT portrait mode must be chosen, rendering the difference in radiation exposure even clearer (131.7 vs. 35.81 μSv). Shielding radiation-sensitive organs can reduce the effective dose considerably. CONCLUSION CBCT should not be recommended for use in all orthodontic patients as a substitute for a conventional set of radiographs. In CBCT, reducing the height of the field of view and shielding the thyroid are advisable methods and must be implemented to lower the exposure dose.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine radiation doses of different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan modes in comparison to a conventional set of orthodontic radiographs (COR) by means of phantom dosimetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) chips (3 × 1 × 1 mm) were used on an adult male tissue-equivalent phantom to record the distribution of the absorbed radiation dose. Three different scanning modes (i.e., portrait, normal landscape, and fast scan landscape) were compared to CORs [i.e., conventional lateral (LC) and posteroanterior (PA) cephalograms and digital panoramic radiograph (OPG)]. RESULTS The following radiation levels were measured: 131.7, 91, and 77 μSv in the portrait, normal landscape, and fast landscape modes, respectively. The overall effective dose for a COR was 35.81 μSv (PA: 8.90 μSv; OPG: 21.87 μSv; LC: 5.03 μSv). DISCUSSION Although one CBCT scan may replace all CORs, one set of CORs still entails 2-4 times less radiation than one CBCT. Depending on the scan mode, the radiation dose of a CBCT is about 3-6 times an OPG, 8-14 times a PA, and 15-26 times a lateral LC. Finally, in order to fully reconstruct cephalograms including the cranial base and other important structures, the CBCT portrait mode must be chosen, rendering the difference in radiation exposure even clearer (131.7 vs. 35.81 μSv). Shielding radiation-sensitive organs can reduce the effective dose considerably. CONCLUSION CBCT should not be recommended for use in all orthodontic patients as a substitute for a conventional set of radiographs. In CBCT, reducing the height of the field of view and shielding the thyroid are advisable methods and must be implemented to lower the exposure dose.

Statistics

Citations

5 citations in Web of Science®
6 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:January 2016
Deposited On:27 Jan 2017 16:49
Last Modified:29 Jan 2017 07:52
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:1434-5293
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-015-0002-4
PubMed ID:26747662

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher