Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT

被引:538
作者
Ludlow, J. B.
Davies-Ludlow, L. E.
Brooks, S. L.
Howerton, W. B.
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Sch Dent, Dept Diagnost Sci & Gen Dent, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Sch Dent, Dept Periodont & Oral Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
radiation dosimetry; phantoms; imaging; risk assessment; tomography; X-ray computed;
D O I
10.1259/dmfr/14340323
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), which provides a lower dose, lower cost alternative to conventional CT, is being used with increasing frequency in the practice of oral and maxillofacial radiology. This study provides comparative measurements of effective dose for three commercially available, large (12") field-of-view (FOV), CBCT units: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Methods: Thermoluminescent dosemeters (TLDs) were placed at 24 sites throughout the layers of the head and neck of a tissue-equivalent human skull RANDO phantom. Depending on availability, the 12" FOV and smaller FOV scanning modes were used with similar phantom positioning geometry for each CBCT unit. Radiation weighted doses to individual organs were summed using 1990 (E-1990) and proposed 2005 (E-2005 draft) ICRP tissue weighting factors to calculate two measures of whole-body effective dose. Dose as a multiple of a representative panoramic radiography dose was also calculated. Results: For repeated runs dosimetry was generally reproducible within 2.5%. Calculated doses in mSv (E-1990, E-2005 draft) were NewTom3G (45, 59), i-CAT (135, 193) and CB Mercuray (477, 558). These are 4 to 42 times greater than comparable panoramic examination doses (6.3 mSv, 13.3 mSv). Reductions in dose were seen with reduction in field size and mA and kV technique factors. Conclusions: CBCT dose varies substantially depending on the device, FOV and selected technique factors. Effective dose detriment is several to many times higher than conventional panoramic imaging and an order of magnitude or more less than reported doses for conventional CT.
引用
收藏
页码:219 / 226
页数:8
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   Effective dose and risk assessment from detailed narrow beam radiography [J].
Avendanio, B ;
Frederiksen, NL ;
Benson, BW ;
Sokolowski, TW .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1996, 82 (06) :713-719
[2]  
BRAND JW, 2003, 145 NCRP
[3]   ALARA still applies [J].
Farman, AG .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 2005, 100 (04) :395-397
[4]   Radiation doses of indirect and direct digital cephalometric radiography [J].
Gijbels, F ;
Sanderink, G ;
Wyatt, J ;
Van Dam, J ;
Nowak, B ;
Jacobs, R .
BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 2004, 197 (03) :149-152
[5]   Application of limited cone beam computed tomography to clinical assessment of alveolar bone grafting: A preliminary report [J].
Hamada, Y ;
Kondoh, T ;
Noguchi, K ;
Iino, M ;
Isono, H ;
Ishii, H ;
Mishima, A ;
Kobayashi, K ;
Seto, I .
CLEFT PALATE-CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL, 2005, 42 (02) :128-137
[6]  
Hatcher David C, 2003, J Calif Dent Assoc, V31, P825
[7]   Antepartum dental radiography and infant low birth weight [J].
Hujoel, PP ;
Bollen, AM ;
Noonan, CJ ;
del Aguila, MA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 291 (16) :1987-1993
[8]  
*ICRP, IN PRESS 2005 REC IN
[9]  
ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection), 1991, ANN ICRP, V21, P1990
[10]   Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit [J].
Ludlow, JB ;
Davies-Ludlow, LE ;
Brooks, SL .
DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2003, 32 (04) :229-234