Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998; 8:1558-1564 https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300050586
Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999; 28:245-248 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600448
Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C Effective dose of dental CBCT-a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140197
Kadesjö N, Benchimol D, Falahat B Evaluation of the effective dose of cone beam CT and multislice CT for temporomandibular joint examinations at optimized exposure levels. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150041
Stratis A, Zhang G, Lopez-Rendon X Two examples of indication specific radiation dose calculations in dental CBCT and Multidetector CT scanners. Phys Med. 2017; 41:71-77 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.03.027
Pauwels R, Jacobs R, Singer SR, Mupparapu M. CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable?. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140238
Theodorakou C, Walker A, Horner K Estimation of paediatric organ and effective doses from dental cone beam CT using anthropomorphic phantoms. Br J Radiol. 2012; 85:153-160 https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/19389412
Pauwels R, Seynaeve L, Henriques JC Optimization of dental CBCT exposures through mAs reduction. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150108
Vasconcelos TV, Neves FS, Queiroz de Freitas D Influence of the milliamperage settings on cone beam computed tomography imaging for implant planning. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29:1364-1348 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3524
Pauwels R, Zhang G, Theodorakou C Effective radiation dose and eye lens dose in dental cone beam CT: effect of field of view and angle of rotation. Br J Radiol. 2014; 87 https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20130654
Hidalgo-Rivas JA, Theodorakou C, Carmichael F Use of cone beam CT in children and young people in three United Kingdom dental hospitals. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2014; 24:336-348 https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12076
Gallichan N, Dixon C, Doughty F Cone beam CT… how is it used in paediatric dentistry?. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019; 29:4-74
Haney E, Gansky SA, Lee JS Comparative analysis of traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography volumetric images in the diagnosis and treatment planning of maxillary impacted canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137:590-547 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.06.035
Şenel B, Kamboroğlu K, Űçok Ő, Yüksel SP, Őzen T, Avsever H. Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities in detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010; 39:501-511
van Daatselaar AN, Tyndall DA, van der Stelt PF. Detection of caries with local CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2003; 32:235-241 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/86813332
Rathore S, Tyndall D, Wright J, Everett E. Ex vivo comparison of Galileos cone beam CT and intraoral radiographs in detecting occlusal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012; 41:489-493 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/57329547
Akdeniz BG, Gröndahl HG, Magnusson B. Accuracy of proximal caries depth measurements: comparison between limited cone beam computed tomography, storage phosphor and film radiography. Caries Res. 2006; 40:202-207 https://doi.org/10.1159/000092226
Wenzel A. Radiographic display of carious lesions and cavitation in approximal surfaces: advantages and drawbacks of conventional and advanced modalities. Acta Odontol Scand. 2014; 72:251-264 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.888757
Kulczyk T, Dyszkiewicz Konwińska M, Owecka M The influence of amalgam fillings on the detection of approximal caries by cone beam CT: in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014; 43 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130342
Cheng JG, Zhang ZL, Wang XY Detection accuracy of proximal caries by phosphor plate and cone-beam computerized tomography images scanned with different resolutions. Clin Oral Investig. 2012; 16:1015-1021 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0599-7
van Daatselaar AN, Tyndall DA, Verheij H, van der Stelt PF. Minimum number of basis projections for caries detection with local CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004; 33:355-360 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/14130662
European Commission. Radiation Protection 136. European guidelines on radiation protection in dental radiology. The safe use of radiographs in dental practice. 2004. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/136.pdf (accessed January 2022)
Mol A, Balasundaram A. In vitro cone beam computed tomography imaging of periodontal bone. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008; 37:319-324 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/26475758
Kasaj A, Willershausen B. Digital volume tomography for diagnostics in periodontology. Int J Comput Dent. 2007; 10:155-168
Patel S, Dawood A, Mannocci F Detection of periapical bone defects in human jaws using cone beam computed tomography and intraoral radiography. Int Endod J. 2009; 42:507-515 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01538.x
Christiansen R, Kirkevang LL, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography for assessment of the periapical bone defect 1 week and 12 months after root-end resection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009; 38:531-536 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/63019695
Patel S, Brown J, Semper M European Society of Endodontology position statement: use of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics: European Society of Endodontology (ESE). Int Endod J. 2019; 52:1675-1678 https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13187
AAE and AAOMR Joint Position Statement: use of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics 2015 update. J Endod. 2015; 41:1393-1396 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.07.013
Lofthag-Hansen S, Huumonen S, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl HG. Limited cone-beam CT and intraoral radiography for the diagnosis of periapical pathology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 103:114-119 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.01.001
Blattner TC, George N, Lee CC Efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography as a modality to accurately identify the presence of second mesiobuccal canals in maxillary first and second molars: a pilot study. J Endod. 2010; 36:867-870 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.023
Durack C, Patel S, Davies J Diagnostic accuracy of small volume cone beam computed tomography and intraoral periapical radiography for the detection of simulated external inflammatory root resorption. Int Endod J. 2011; 44:136-147 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01819.x
Zhu J, Wang X, Fang Y An update on the diagnosis and treatment of dens invaginatus. Aust Dent J. 2017; 62:261-275 https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12513
Hassan B, Metska ME, Ozok AR, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR. Detection of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth by a cone beam computed tomography scan. J Endod. 2009; 35:(5)719-22 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.01.022
Wörtche R, Hassfeld S, Lux CJ Clinical application of cone beam digital volume tomography in children with cleft lip and palate. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006; 35:88-94 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/27536604
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is becoming increasingly available since its introduction in the late 1990s. The technique provides low-dose high-resolution images of the teeth and jaws. This article discusses the clinical applications of CBCT in children. CBCT is most commonly used in children for localization of teeth and the assessment of root resorption. CBCT can offer an advantage over conventional imaging in selected cases. The decision to image using CBCT should be judged for each individual, and should impact on management and outcome.
CPD/Clinical Relevance: CBCT affords low-dose, high-resolution imaging that can be used in appropriately selected paediatric cases.
Article
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was developed in the late 1990s,1,2 and provides high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) imaging of the teeth and jaws. A cone-shaped X-ray beam linked to a flat-panel detector rotates around the patient's head, obtaining hundreds of separate frames in less than 20 seconds. The frames are digitally processed, to provide cross-sectional images in any desired plane. Image resolution is better than medical computed tomography (CT) scans owing to a smaller voxel size. In addition, the resolution is equally good in all planes as the voxels making up the data set are isotropic. The radiation dose tends to be less than medical CT.3 However, it should be realized that fully optimized modern medical CT scanners can produce images of comparable dose to CBCT.4,5
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
