Advertisement

Cone Beam CT

  • Samuel J. Zeichner
Chapter

Abstract

Cone beam computed tomography is a form of tomographic imaging. It is a derivative of multidetector computed tomography. CBCT is a technology characterized by compromises. As a consequence, CBCT has limited capabilities, most notably the inability to differentiate soft tissue densities and meager computational capacities of the image-processing system. The principal advantage of CBCT is its dimensional accuracy and high spatial resolution. Moreover, it is vastly less expensive and generally exhibits lower radiation dose than its forerunner, MDCT. A critical view of the literature reflects that the evidence-based applications of CBCT in craniomaxillofacial surgery are restricted.

Keywords

CBCT Cone beam CT Evidence-based applications Dentistry Tomography 

References

  1. 1.
    Robb RA. The dynamic spatial reconstructor: an x-ray video-fluoroscopic CT scanner for dynamic volume imaging of moving organs. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1982;1:22–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kalender WA. Computed tomography. Fundamentals, system technology, image quality, applications. 2nd ed. Erlangen: Publicis Corporate Publishing; 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kau CH, Bozic M, English J, Lee R, Bussa H, Ellis RK. Cone-beam computed tomography of the maxillofacial region-an update. Int J Med Robot. 2009;5(4):366–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kalender WA. Flat-detector computed tomography (FD-CT). Eur Radiol. 2007;17:2767–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nemtoi A, Czink C, Haba D, Gahleitner A. Cone-beam CT: a current overview of devices. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120443.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Scarfe W, Farman A. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52:707–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van den Hoff J. Evaluation of tomographic data. In: Salzer R, editor. Biomedical Imaging: Principles and Applications. Hoboken: Wiley; 2012. Ch 2.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Cone-beam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(6):1088–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sierwerdsen JH, Jafray DA. Cone beam CT with a flat-panel imager: magnitude and effects of x-ray scatter. Med Phys. 2001;28:230–1.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, Käser 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(6):367–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schulze RKW, Brüllmann D. Spatial resolution in CBCT machines for dental/maxillofacial applications—what do we know today? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140204. ReviewCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    European Commission. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology: evidence based guidelines. Radiation Protection Publication; 2012. p, 172.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Güldner C, Pistorius SM, Diogo I, Bien S, Sesterhenn A, Werner JA. Analysis of pneumatization and neurovascular structures of the sphenoid sinus using cone-beam tomography (CBT). Acta Radiol. 2012;53(2):214–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Prisman E, Daly MJ, Chan H, Siewerdsen JH, Vescan A, Irish JC. Real-time tracking and virtual endoscopy in cone-beam CT-guided surgery of the sinuses and skull base in a cadaver model. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2011;1(1):70–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haskell JA, McCrillis J, Haskell BS, et al. Effects of mandibular advancement device on airway dimensions assessed with cone beam computed tomography. Semin Orthod. 2009;15:132–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peltonen LI, Aarnisalo AA, Kortesniemi MK, Suomalainen A, Jero J, Robinson S. Limited cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the middle ear: a comparison with multislice helical computed tomography. Acta Radiol. 2007;48(2):207–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dahmani-Causse M, Marx M, Deguine O, Fraysse B, Lepage B, Escudé B. Morphologic examination of the temporal bone by cone beam computed tomography: comparison with multislice helical computed tomography. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2011;128(5):230–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Oral and Maxillofacial RadiologyColumbia University College of Dental MedicineNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.University of Basel Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical MorphologyBiomedical Engineering/Hightech Research Center, Gewerbestrasse 14–16AllschwilSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations