ABSTRACT
Stafne defect also known as Stafne bone cavity is a lingual surface depression generally found in the posterior mandible. This entity is usually unilateral and asymptomatic, found during routine dental radiographic evaluation. Stafne defect appears as a well-defined, oval, corticated entity located below the inferior alveolar canal. These entities are the inclusion of the salivary gland tissues. In this case report, we present the case of a bilateral Stafne defect that was asymmetrically located in the mandible and was incidentally detected on the cone-beam computed tomography scan taken for implant treatment planning. This case report highlights the significance of three-dimensional imaging and correctly diagnosing the incidental findings within the scan.
ABSTRACT
Progressive condylar resorption is a dysfunctional remodeling of the temporomandibular joint of unknown origin. It usually manifests in young girls and causes reduced ramus height, loss of condylar volume, steep mandibular angle, limited jaw motion, and pain. On magnetic resonance imaging, the condition is associated with anterior disc displacement with or without reduction. This article discusses imaging features of progressive condylar resorption that cause severe temporomandibular joint degenerative changes, emphasizing the careful evaluation of imaging changes of the temporomandibular joint in young female patients. The early diagnosis of progressive condylar resorption helps to reduce the further progression of the condition.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Determine the effect of the motion correction system on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image quality parameters, artifacts, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) using different motion settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A customized phantom insert array was prepared using SEDENTEX CT IQ Phantom (Leeds Test Objects, Yorkshire, England) stabilized over a rotating electric turntable. Thirty baseline CBCT scans were acquired with standardized technique factors on the ProMax 3D (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) machine using combinations of different motion settings, including no motion, three- and six-degree motion, and with and without the use of a motion correction system. The standardized images were exported to ImageJ software. Image quality parameters, artifacts, and CNR values were evaluated and compared among the different acquisition settings. RESULTS: The use of the motion correction system algorithm compared with the different motion settings showed a statistically significant difference for all the parameters (p<0.05) except for artifact values for six-degree motion (p<0.07). The effect of different motion settings on the parameters was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The use of a motion correction system, a proprietary algorithm-based system incorporated in the ProMax 3D CBCT unit, deteriorates the image quality characteristics evaluated in this in vitro study, namely artifact value and CNR. Its use in clinical settings might be limited to situations where patient motion is expected and appropriate head stabilization is not possible due to age or disease.
