English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective In recent years, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has become a key diagnostic tool in dentistry. CBCT can provide 3D images of the maxillofacial area to help dental practitioners in diagnosis and treatment, especially implant placement and treatment of pathogenic lesions. This study aimed to compare the Hounsfield unit (HU) values obtained from CBCT images for bones of different densities with the corresponding HU values from multidetector CT (MDCT) images. Methods Cube-shaped bone blocks of identical size were cut from the middle section of the cow ribs and femur area such that they had a layer of cortical bone in their buccal, lingual, and top surfaces and trabecular bone in the middle. MDCT scans were performed using a Somatom Sensation Ct Scanner. After determining HU from the results of these scans, nine suitable specimens from different ranges of HU were chosen for comparison. HU of the CBCT images was computed by the dedicated software of the CBCT machine. Finally, HU values obtained from MDCT and CBCT were compared. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 25 at the 0.05 significance level. Results The results showed a statistically significant difference between the mean HU from MDCT images and the mean HU from CBCT images (P<0.05). For similar specimens, CBCT produced higher mean HU values than MDCT. The Pearson correlation test detected a significant direct relationship between the HU values of specimens in MDCT and CBCT (P<0.05). Conclusions For the tools and software used in this study, there was no significant difference between the HU values obtained from MDCT and CBCT, but the mean HU obtained from CBCT was higher than that from MDCT.

journal of contemporary medical sciences

Comparison of the Hounsfield Unit Values Obtained From Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) Images for Different Bone Densities