연구동향 분석
박사

콘빔전산화단층장치에서 노출조건의 최적화 및 주관적 영상의 질과 기술적 영상의 질 사이의 상관관계

박하나 2019년

논문상세정보
인용/피인용
' 콘빔전산화단층장치에서 노출조건의 최적화 및 주관적 영상의 질과 기술적 영상의 질 사이의 상관관계' 의 주제별 논문영향력
논문영향력 선정 방법
논문영향력 요약
주제
  • 외과의 다방면
  • Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
  • Image Quality
  • optimization
동일주제 총논문수 논문피인용 총횟수 주제별 논문영향력의 평균
3,421 0

0.0%

' 콘빔전산화단층장치에서 노출조건의 최적화 및 주관적 영상의 질과 기술적 영상의 질 사이의 상관관계' 의 참고문헌

  • Watanabe H, Honda E, Tetsumura A and Kurabayashi T. A comparative study for spatial resolution and subjective image characteristics of a multi-slice CT and a cone-beam CT for dental use. Eur J Radiol 2011; 77(3), 397-402.
  • Sur J, Seki K, Koizumi H, Nakajima K and Okano T. Effects of tube current on cone-beam computerized tomography image quality for presurgical implant planning in vitro. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010; 110(3), e29-e33.
  • Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, K ser Y, Peltola J, Kortesniemi M. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009; 38: 367-78.
  • Schulze RKW, Berndt D and d'Hoedt B. On cone beam computed tomography artifacts induced by titanium implants. Clinical oral implants research 2010; 21(1), 100-107.
  • Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovie P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006; 72: 75-80.
  • Pauwels R, Stamatakis H, Manousaridis G, Walker A, Michielsen K, Bosmans H, et al. Development and applicability of a quality control phantom for dental cone-beam CT. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2011; 12: 245-60
  • Pauwels R, Stamatakis H, Bosmans H, Bogaerts R, Jacobs R Horner K, et al. Quantification of metal artifacts on cone beam computed tomography images. Clinical oral implants research 2013; 24: 94-99.
  • Pauwels R, Silkosessak O, Jacobs R, Bogaerts R, Bosmans H and Panmekiate S. A pragmatic approach to determine the optimal kVp in cone beam CT: balancing contrast-to-noise ratio and radiation dose. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43(5), 20140059.
  • Pauwels R, Seynaeve L, Henriques J, Oliveira-Santos C, Souza P, Westphalen F, et al. Optimization of dental CBCT exposures through mAs reduction, Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20150108.
  • Pauwels R, Beinberger J, Stamatakis H, Tsiklakis K, Walker A, Bosmans H, et al. Comparison of spatial and contrast resolution for cone-beam computed tomography scanners. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 114: 127-35.
  • Panmekiate S, Apinhasmit W and Petersson A. Effect of electric potential and current on mandibular linear measurements in cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41(7), 578-582.
  • McGuigan MB, Duncan HF and Horner K. An analysis of effective dose optimization and its impact on image quality and diagnostic efficacy relating to dental cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Swiss dental journal 2018; 128(4), 297-316.
  • Ludlow JB, Walker C. Assessment of phantom dosimetry and image quality of i-CAT FLX cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144: 802-17.
  • Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, White SC. Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139: 1237-43.
  • Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 219-26.
  • Loubele M, Van Assche N, Carpentier K, Maes F, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, et al. Comparative localized linear accuracy of small-field cone-beam CT and multislice CT for alveolar bone measurements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105: 512-8.
  • Loubele M, Maes F, Schutyser F, Marchal G, Jacobs R, Suetens P. Assessment of bone segmentation quality of cone-beam CT versus multislice spiral CT: a pilot study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102: 225-34.
  • Loubele M, Jacobs R, Maes F, Denis K, White S, Coudyzer W, et al. Image quality vs radiation dose of four cone beam computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008; 37: 309-18.
  • Liang X, Jacobs R, Hassan B, Li L, Pauwels R, Corpas L, et al. A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT) Part І. On subjective image quality. Eur J Radiol 2010; 75: 265-9.
  • Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorized data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
  • Kwong JC, Palomo JM, Landers MA, Figueroa A and Hans MG. Image quality produced by different cone-beam computed tomography settings. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133(2), 317-327.
  • International Commission on Radiological Protection. Managing Patient Dose in Digital Radiology. Ottawa, ON, Canada; ICRP Publication 93. Ann.; 2004.
  • Hidalgo Rivas JA, Horner K, Thiruvenkatachari B, Davies J and Theodorakou C. Development of a low-dose protocol for cone beam CT examinations of the anterior maxilla in children. Br J Radiol 2015; 88(1054), 20150559.
  • Goulston R, Davies J, Horner K and Murphy F. Dose optimization by altering the operating potential and tube current exposure time product in dental cone beam CT: a systematic review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45(3), 20150254.
  • Freitas DQ, Fontenele RC, Nascimento EHL, Vasconcelos TV and Noujeim M. Influence of acquisition parameters on the magnitude of cone beam computed tomography artifacts. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47: 20180151.
  • De Oliveira MV, Wenzel A, Campos PS and Spin-Neto R. Quality assurance phantoms for cone beam computed tomography: a systematic literature review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46(3), 20160329.
  • Cohnen M, Kemper J, M bes O, Pawelzik J, M dder U. Radiation dose in dental radiology. Eur Radiol 2002; 12: 634-7. Dawood A, Brown J, Sauret-Jackson V and Purkayastha S. Optimization of cone beam CT exposure for pre-surgical evaluation of the implant site. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41(1), 70-74.
  • Choi JW. Analysis of the priority of anatomic structures according to the diagnostic task in cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2016; 46: 245-9.
  • Choi JW, Lee SS, Choi SC, Heo MS, Huh KH, Yi WJ, et al. Relationship between physical factors and subjective image quality of cone-beam computed tomography images according to diagnostic task. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015; 119: 357-65.
  • Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM Jr. and Boone JM. The essential physics of medical imaging. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012. p.60-99
  • Br llmann D and Schulze RKW. Spatial resolution in CBCT machines for dental/maxillofacial applications—what do we know today? Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44(1), 20140204.
  • Bamba J, Araki K, Endo A and Okano T. Image quality assessment of three cone beam CT machines using the SEDENTEXCT CT phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20120445.
  • Al-Okshi A, Theodorakou C and Lindh C. Dose optimization for assessment of periodontal structures in cone beam CT examinations Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160311.