RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare the image quality produced by equivalent low-dose and default sinus imaging protocols of a conventional dental cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scanner, an extremity CBCT scanner and a clinical multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scanner. METHODS: Three different phantoms were scanned using dose-neutral ultra-low-dose and low-dose sinus imaging protocols, as well as default sinus protocols of each device. Quantified parameters of image quality included modulation transfer function (MTF) to characterize the spatial response of the imaging system, contrast-to-noise ratio, low contrast visibility, image uniformity and Hounsfield unit accuracy. MTF was calculated using the line spread and edge spread functions (LSF and ESF). RESULTS: The dental CBCT had superior performance over the extremity CBCT in each studied parameter at similar dose levels. The MDCT had better contrast-to-noise ratio, low contrast visibility and image uniformity than the CBCT scanners. However, the CBCT scanners had better resolution compared to the MDCT. Accuracy of HU values for different materials was on the same level between the dental CBCT and MDCT, but substantially poorer performance was observed with the extremity CBCT. CONCLUSIONS: The studied dental CBCT scanner showed superior performance over the studied extremity CBCT scanner when using dose-neutral imaging protocols. In case a dental CBCT is not available, the given extremity CBCT is still a viable option as it provides the benefit of high resolution over a conventional MDCT.
