Three-dimensional fracture visualisation of multidetector CT of the skull base in trauma patients: comparison of three reconstruction algorithms

Ringl, Helmut; Schernthaner, Rüdiger; Philipp, M.; Metz-Schimmerl, Sylvia; Czerny, Christian; Weber, Michael; Gabler, Cornelia; Steiner-Ringl, Andrea; Peloschek, Philipp; Herold, Christian; Schima, Wolfgang

doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1435-1

Cited by 30 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…4,[12][13][14] In all children, we found that 2D+3D CT increased the sensitivity (81.3%, p < 0.05) when compared with 2D CT only (74.5%) in the diagnosis of linear skull fractures. In addition, fewer false-negative calls (or undercalls) with 2D+3D (n = 45) when compared with 2D alone (n = 65) showed statistical significance (p < 0.05).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Pediatric skull fracture diagnosis: should 3D CT reconstructions be added as routine imaging?

Orman¹,

Wagner²,

Seeburg³

et al. 2015

PED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECT The authors compared the efficacy of combining 2D+3D CT reconstructions with standard 2D CT images in the diagnosis of linear skull fractures in children with head trauma. METHODS This was a retrospective evaluation of consecutive head CT studies of children presenting with head trauma. Two experienced pediatric neuroradiologists in consensus created the standard of reference. Three readers independently evaluated the 2D CT images alone and then in combination with the 3D reconstructions for the diagnosis of linear skull fractures. Sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of linear skull fractures utilizing 2D and 2D+3D CT in combination were measured for children less than 2 years of age and for all children for analysis by the 3 readers. RESULTS Included in the study were 250 consecutive CT studies of 250 patients (167 boys and 83 girls). The mean age of the children was 7.82 years (range 4 days to 17.4 years). 2D+3D CT combined had a higher sensitivity and specificity (83.9% and 97.1%, respectively) compared with 2D alone (78.2% and 92.8%, respectively) with statistical significance for specificity (p < 0.05) in children less than 2 years of age. 2D+3D CT combined had a higher sensitivity and specificity (81.3% and 90.5%, respectively) compared with 2D alone (74.5% and 89.1%, respectively) with statistical significance for sensitivity (p < 0.05) in all children. CONCLUSIONS In this study, 2D+3D CT in combination showed increased sensitivity in the diagnosis of linear skull fractures in all children and increased specificity in children less than 2 years of age. In children less than 2 years of age, added confidence in the interpretation of fractures by distinguishing them from sutures may have a significant implication in the setting of nonaccidental trauma. Furthermore, 3D CT is available at no added cost, scan time, or radiation exposure, providing trainees and clinicians with limited experience an additional valuable tool for routine imaging of pediatric head trauma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Pediatric skull fracture diagnosis: should 3D CT reconstructions be added as routine imaging?

Orman¹,

Wagner²,

Seeburg³

et al. 2015

PED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantage of three-dimensional reconstruction in emergency patients with skull-base fractures using solid and transparent volume-rendering techniques and maximum intensity projection (MIP) has been examined by Ringl et al [10] . They have ascertained that MIP with regard to sensitivity (P = 0.9) visualizes fractures slightly better than high resolution multiplanar reformation (HR-MPR).…”

Section: Bony Structures In the Head And Neckmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Damage detection at 24-48 h after onset of symptoms is not always possible. Therefore, Totaro et al [45] have concluded that diffusion-weighted imaging in the postacute phase of cerebral ischemia in patients in whom CT did not yield a definite diagnosis could be the solution [10] . MRA, with its improvements in parallel imaging at high-field strength, with resultant high-spatial-resolution data acquisition over large fields of view has become an interesting alternative to the traditional catheter-directed selective angiography [46] .…”

Section: Blood Vesselsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different imaging techniques in the head and neck: Assets and drawbacks

Vogl

Harth²,

Siebenhandl³

2010

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review, the gold standard imaging techniques for the head and neck and the latest upcoming techniques are presented, by comparing computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography-CT, as well as ultrasound, depending on the examined area. The advantages and disadvantages of each examination protocol are presented. This article illustrates the connection between the imaging technique and the examined area. Therefore, the head and neck area is divided into different sections such as bony structures, nervous system, mucous membranes and squamous epithelium, glandular tissue, and lymphatic tissue and vessels. Finally, the latest techniques in the field of head and neck imaging such as multidetector CT, dual-energy CT, flash CT, magnetic resonance angiography, spectroscopy, and diffusion tensor tractography using 3 tesla magnetic resonance are discussed.

show abstract

“…Despite these documented 3D applications of conventional MDCT and CBCT, there has been no systematic assessment of the specific CT image acquisition parameters 8 as well as the 3D reconstruction techniques 9 that will provide the most accurate linear, angular, volumetric, and surface area measurements. Assessments of 3D-CT renderings (MDCT or CBCT) using human body parts, bony remains, phantom objects, and anatomical models have consistently found linear measurements to be statistically accurate, irrespective of CT acquisition parameters 10–20 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of computed tomographic scanner parameters and 3-dimensional volume rendering techniques on the accuracy of linear, angular, and volumetric measurements of the mandible

Whyms¹,

Vorperian²,

Gentry³

et al. 2013

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This study investigates the effect of scanning parameters on the accuracy of measurements from three-dimensional multi-detector computed tomography (3D-CT) mandible renderings. A broader range of acceptable parameters can increase the availability of CT studies for retrospective analysis. Study Design Three human mandibles and a phantom object were scanned using 18 combinations of slice thickness, field of view, and reconstruction algorithm and three different threshold-based segmentations. Measurements of 3D-CT models and specimens were compared. Results Linear and angular measurements were accurate, irrespective of scanner parameters or rendering technique. Volume measurements were accurate with a slice thickness of 1.25 mm, but not 2.5 mm. Surface area measurements were consistently inflated. Conclusions Linear, angular and volumetric measurements of mandible 3D-CT models can be confidently obtained from a range of parameters and rendering techniques. Slice thickness is the primary factor affecting volume measurements. These findings should also apply to 3D rendering using cone-beam-CT.

show abstract

Three-dimensional fracture visualisation of multidetector CT of the skull base in trauma patients: comparison of three reconstruction algorithms

Cited by 30 publications

References 22 publications

Pediatric skull fracture diagnosis: should 3D CT reconstructions be added as routine imaging?

Pediatric skull fracture diagnosis: should 3D CT reconstructions be added as routine imaging?

Different imaging techniques in the head and neck: Assets and drawbacks

The effect of computed tomographic scanner parameters and 3-dimensional volume rendering techniques on the accuracy of linear, angular, and volumetric measurements of the mandible

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About