Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2004 Nov;33(6):355-60.
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/14130662.

Minimum number of basis projections for caries detection with local CT

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Minimum number of basis projections for caries detection with local CT

A N van Daatselaar et al. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between the number of basis projections for local computed tomography (CT) and the detection of proximal caries and to find a minimum number of projections needed to maintain diagnostic accuracy.

Methods: We presented observers (n = 12) with stacks of both axial and vertical CT slices of 23 extracted teeth placed in a dry human mandible. The slices were prepared with 14, 20, 33 and 100 basis projections. The observers scored the proximal surfaces for the presence of caries on a 1-5 confidence scale. The performance of the varying number of projections was compared with conventional digital radiographs.

Results: The performance of all four CT modalities was significantly better than conventional radiographs (P = 0.005 to P = 0.021) and showed a consistent increase with the number of projections. Diagnostic performance depended significantly on lesion depth (P = 0.00), but not on observer.

Conclusions: We conclude that the number of CT projections used can be reduced at least to 20 with the diagnostic performance still markedly better than that of conventional film, provided that the observer can make use of both axial and vertical stacks of CT slices.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by