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
. 2024 Jan 10;14(2):159.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14020159.

A Quantitative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Metal Artifact Reduction Algorithm in Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Images with Stainless Steel Orthodontic Brackets and Arch Wires: An Ex Vivo Study

Affiliations

A Quantitative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Metal Artifact Reduction Algorithm in Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Images with Stainless Steel Orthodontic Brackets and Arch Wires: An Ex Vivo Study

Mojgan Shavakhi et al. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

The presence of high-density and high-atomic number materials results in the generation of artifacts in cone beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images. To minimize artifacts in CBCT images, the metal artifact reduction (MAR) tool was developed. This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of the MAR algorithm in CBCT images of teeth with stainless steel orthodontic brackets with or without arch wires in buccal and lingual positions obtained using the Galileos Sirona CBCT scanner. In this in vitro study, 20 stainless steel brackets were attached to the maxillary dentition from the right second premolar to the left second premolar teeth of a human skull. In the first group, 10 brackets were bonded to the buccal surface, and in the second group, 10 brackets were bonded to the palatal surface of these teeth. CBCT scans were obtained for each group with or without orthodontic stainless steel wires using a Galileos Sirona CBCT scanner with exposure parameters of 85 kVp and 21 mAs. CBCT images were obtained two times with and two times without MAR activation. The DICOM format of the CBCT images was imported to ImageJ software (version 1.54), and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated and compared for each bracket in 15 and 20 mm distances and 20, 40, and 90 degrees on each side. Statistical analysis was performed using the t test (α = 0.05). CNR values of different distances and different teeth were not significantly different between the two MAR modes (p > 0.05). MAR activation had a significant impact in increasing CNR and reducing artifacts only when brackets were in palatal (p = 0.03). In the other bracket and wire positions, the effect of the MAR algorithm on CNR was not significant (p > 0.05). In conclusion, MAR activation significantly increased CNR, but only when the brackets were in a palatal position. In the other bracket and wire positions, the effect of the MAR algorithm is not significant.

Keywords: cone beam computed tomography; metal artifact; metal artifact reduction; orthodontic brackets.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) A line was drawn from the center of the bracket along the buccal surface of the tooth. A line perpendicular to this line was drawn. Regions of interests (ROIs) located at intervals of 15 and 20 mm from center of bracket and with angles of 20 and 40 degrees on each side of perpendicular line and also on the perpendicular line. (b) 10 ROIs (boxes) of the same size (2 mm × 2 mm) were established for brackets: 5 ROIs in the 15 mm distance (1) and 5 ROIs in the 20 mm distance (2).

References

    1. Moolya N.N., Shetty A., Gupta N., Gupta A., Jalan V., Sharma R. Orthodontic bracket designs and their impact on microbial profile and periodontal disease: A clinical trial. J. Orthod. Sci. 2014;3:125. doi: 10.4103/2278-0203.143233. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Proffit W.R., Fields H.W., Larson B., Sarver D.M. Contemporary Orthodontics-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2018.
    1. Rahiotis C., Schricker S. Orthodontic Applications of Biomaterials. Elsevier; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2017. Bonding with glass ionomer cements and resin-modified glass ionomer cements; pp. 253–265.
    1. Saini P., Sharma H., Kalha A.S., Chandna A.K. The current evidence and implications of lingual orthodontics. J. Indian Orthod. Soc. 2016;50:4–9. doi: 10.4103/0301-5742.198607. - DOI
    1. Beyling F., Schwestka-Polly R., Wiechmann D. Lingual orthodontics for children and adolescents: Improvement of the indirect bonding protocol. Head Face Med. 2013;9:27. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-9-27. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources