Rubens Spin-Neto

Quality assurance phantoms for cone beam computed tomography: a systematic literature review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • Marcus Vinicius Linhares de Oliveira, 1 Department of Technology in Health and Biology, Federal Institute of Bahia, Salvador (BA), Brazil.
  • ,
  • Ann Wenzel
  • Paulo Sergio Flores Campos, 3 Department of Interactive Processes of Organs and Systems, Institute of Health Sciences, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, (BA), Brazil.
  • ,
  • Rubens Spin-Neto

OBJECTIVE: To undertake a systematic review on quality assurance phantoms for CBCT imaging, including studies on development and application of the phantoms.

METHODS: The MEDLINE (PubMed) bibliographic database was searched until May 2016 for studies evaluating the development and use of phantoms in CBCT image quality assurance. The search strategy was restricted to English-language publications using the following combined terms: (Cone Beam CT) OR (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) OR (Cone-Beam Computed Tomography) OR (CBCT) AND (quality OR phantom). It was assessed, which of the six image quality parameters stated by the European Commission could be evaluated with each phantom, and which of them actually were.

RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 37 studies, which had developed and used (25) or only used (12) a phantom in CBCT image quality assurance. According to the literature, in seven phantoms it is possible to evaluate four or more image quality parameters, while in 11 phantoms merely one parameter can be evaluated. Only two phantons permit the evaluation of the six image quality parameters stated by the European Commission. The parameters, which can most often be evaluated using a phantom, are image density values, spatial resolution, and geometric accuracy. The SEDENTEXCT phantom was used most frequently. In two studies all quality parameters suggested by the European Commission were evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS: Quality assurance phantoms rarely allow all image quality parameters stated by the European Commission to be evaluated. Furthermore, alternative phantoms, which allow all image quality parameters to be evaluated in a single exposure, even for a small FOV, should be developed.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftDentomaxillofacial Radiology
Vol/bind46
Nummer3
Sider (fra-til)20160329
ISSN0250-832X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 3 jan. 2017

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 107772712