2016
DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.4.066-072.oar
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Digital orthodontic radiographic set versus cone-beam computed tomography: an evaluation of the effective dose

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the equivalent and effective doses of different digital radiographic methods (panoramic, lateral cephalometric and periapical) with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: Precalibrated thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed at 24 locations in an anthropomorphic phantom (Alderson Rando Phantom, Alderson Research Laboratories, New York, NY, USA), representing a medium sized adult. The following devices were tested: Heliodent Plus (Sirona Dental Systems, B… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The effective dose of the CBCT was between 5 and 7 times higher than the combined doses of a PAN and LC. The overall effective dose of a standard dose PAN plus LC was 26.9 μSv (PAN 21.87 μSv + LC 5.03 μSv) [8] or 30 μSv (PAN 27.1 μSv + LC 2.50 μSv) [9] versus an overall effective dose of a CBCT of 132 μSv [8] or 210 μSv [9]. The doses mentioned in the research of Signorelli (2016) [8] and Chinem (2016) [9] were measured on different machines (e.g., Signorelli: KaVo 3D eXam, Chinem: Heliodent Plus (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany), Orthophos XG 5 (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany), and i-CAT (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, USA).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effective dose of the CBCT was between 5 and 7 times higher than the combined doses of a PAN and LC. The overall effective dose of a standard dose PAN plus LC was 26.9 μSv (PAN 21.87 μSv + LC 5.03 μSv) [8] or 30 μSv (PAN 27.1 μSv + LC 2.50 μSv) [9] versus an overall effective dose of a CBCT of 132 μSv [8] or 210 μSv [9]. The doses mentioned in the research of Signorelli (2016) [8] and Chinem (2016) [9] were measured on different machines (e.g., Signorelli: KaVo 3D eXam, Chinem: Heliodent Plus (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany), Orthophos XG 5 (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim, Germany), and i-CAT (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, USA).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the significant advantages of this technology related to the possibility of obtaining volumetric assessments and cross-sectional evaluations at multiple levels, its wide application in large-scale studies is still hindered by factors such as cost and availability. CBCT exposes patients to greater radiation doses than conventional lateral cephalograms [4447] and therefore its application in the context of cross-sectional studies is not ethically justifiable. Furthermore, conventional lateral cephalograms and those derived from 3D CBCTs demonstrated no significant differences in most linear and angular cephalometric measurements [4850] and more specifically in the UAS area [51].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, with the modernization of CT scanners, we observed that the radiation dose used in a conventional examination of a dental arch for example, has decreased substantively. It's important to consider that a 5-hour flight at altitudes of 12 km can result in an equivalent cosmic radiation dose around 25 µSv and a cone beam computed tomography of a small area (small FOV) expose the patient to a radiation dose of approximately 30 µSv, representing the patient greater benefits than risks [16,17,18]. This is unlike panoramic radiographs, which have reduced cost, reduced radiation dose and are more accessible, but display images in only two dimensions, causing an overlap of various bones and soft tissue structures [19].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%