Cone-beam computed tomography produces images of numerically comparable diagnostic quality for bone and inferior quality for soft tissues compared with fan-beam computed tomography in cadaveric equine metacarpophalangeal joints.
Abstract: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is an emerging modality for imaging of the equine patient. The objective of this prospective, descriptive, exploratory study was to assess visualization tasks using CBCT compared with conventional fan-beam CT (FBCT) for imaging of the metacarpophalangeal joint in equine cadavers. Satisfaction scores were numerically excellent with both CBCT and FBCT for bone evaluation, and FBCT was numerically superior for soft tissue evaluation. Preference tests indicated FBCT was numerically superior for soft tissue evaluation, while preference test scoring for bone was observer-dependent. Findings from this study can be used as background for future studies evaluating CBCT image quality in live horses.
© 2023 The Authors. Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Radiology.
Publication Date: 2023-11-10 PubMed ID: 37947254DOI: 10.1111/vru.13309Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The study compares the quality of images produced by Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and Fan-beam computed tomography (FBCT) in imaging the metacarpophalangeal joint in equine cadavers. The findings reveal that the CBCT and FBCT produce excellent images for bone evaluations, but the FBCT outperforms CBCT in terms of soft tissue evaluation.
Research Objective and Methodology
- The aim of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of CBCT and FBCT in imaging the metacarpophalangeal joint in equine cadavers, with a particular focus on bone and soft tissue visualizations.
- This was a prospective, descriptive, and exploratory study where the researchers employed the use of CBCT and FBCT in their evaluations.
- Reliance on both types of imaging techniques was pivotal for thorough assessments given their unique strengths in producing numerically comparable quality of images for different tissues.
Research Findings
- The study determined that satisfaction scores were high with both CBCT and FBCT when it came to bone evaluation. Both technologies were highly effective and provided similar quality results in this context.
- However, FBCT was found to be superior in soft tissue evaluation, indicating its more effective nature for imaging in tissues other than the bone.
- The findings also highlighted that preference testing for bone was observer-dependent, meaning that some observers may prefer one method over the other based on their specific situations or requirements.
Implications and Possible Applications
- This study serves as a foundation for further studies that aim to evaluate image quality using CBCT on live horses.
- The findings can also provide insights to veterinarians and equine health experts for selecting the most suitable imaging method depending on the tissues to be evaluated, which would enhance their diagnostic accuracy.
- Additionally, this study’s results can inform the development of more effective imaging tools in the future, potentially leading to the enhancement of equine healthcare.
Cite This Article
APA
Stewart HL, Siewerdsen JH, Selberg KT, Bills KW, Kawcak CE.
(2023).
Cone-beam computed tomography produces images of numerically comparable diagnostic quality for bone and inferior quality for soft tissues compared with fan-beam computed tomography in cadaveric equine metacarpophalangeal joints.
Vet Radiol Ultrasound.
https://doi.org/10.1111/vru.13309 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Clinical Studies, New Bolton Center, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, USA.
- Department of Imaging Physics, Neurosurgery, and Radiation Physics, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
- Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
- Department of Clinical Studies, New Bolton Center, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, USA.
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
References
This article includes 12 references
- Koch C, Pauwels F, Schweizer-Gorgas D. Technical set-up and case illustrations of orthopaedic cone beam computed tomography in the standing horse.. Equine Vet Educ 2021;33:255-262.
- Brown KA, Davidson EJ, Johnson AL. Inflammatory cytokines in horses with cervical articular process joint osteoarthritis on standing cone beam computed tomography.. Equine Vet J 2021;53:944-954.
- Pauwels FE, Van der Vekens E, Christan Y. Feasibility, indications, and radiographically confirmed diagnoses of standing extremity cone beam computed tomography in the horse.. Vet Surg 2021;50:365-374.
- Curtiss AL, Ortved KF, Dallap-Schaer B. Validation of standing cone beam computed tomography for diagnosing subchondral fetlock pathology in the Thoroughbred racehorse.. Equine Vet J 2021;53:510-523.
- Demehri S, Muhit A, Zbijewski W. Assessment of image quality in soft tissue and bone visualization tasks for a dedicated extremity cone-beam CT system.. Eur Radiol 2015;25:1742-1751.
- Philips Healthcare. Philips GEMINI TF Big Bore PET/CT specifications.. Dec 2011.
- Carrino JA, al Muhit A, Zbijewski W. Dedicated cone-beam CT system for extremity imaging.. Radiology 2014;270:816-824.
- Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B. Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT.. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:e1-e7.
- Dubreuil T, Mouly J, Ltaief-Boudrigua A. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and multislice computed tomography in the assessment of extremity fractures.. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2019;43:372-378.
- Jaroma A, Suomalainen JS, Niemitukia L. Imaging of symptomatic total knee arthroplasty with cone beam computed tomography.. Acta radiol 2018;59:1500-1507.
- Jones AK, Odisio BC. Comparison of radiation dose and image quality between flat panel computed tomography and multidetector computed tomography in a hybrid CT-angiography suite.. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2020;21:121-127.
- Lechuga L, Weidlich GA. Cone beam CT vs. fan beam CT: a comparison of image quality and dose delivered between two differing CT imaging modalities.. Cureus 2016;8:e778.
Citations
This article has been cited 0 times.Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists