Cone Beam Computed Tomography: Benefits and Cancer Risks in Digital Dentistry
Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Cancer Risks
Keywords:
Cone Beam computer tomography, Diagnostic radiology, Digital dentistry, Head and neck cancerAbstract
In the digital dentistry era, three-dimensional imaging for oral examination with Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) has become widely adopted and is increasingly more affordable. It has become one of the standard methods used for diagnostic, treatment, and follow-up purposes in dentistry. However, if the use is not properly controlled and the potential risks of excessive or unnecessary exposure are not understood, adverse effects on patients, particularly increasing the risk of cancer, may occur. This literature aims to compile essential information, beginning with basic knowledge about radiation and its effects on the body, methods of measuring radiation, together with principles of preventing unnecessary radiation exposure while maintaining sufficient diagnostic purposes. The review adhered to the 3 fundamental principles of radiation protection established by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Finally, it emphasizes the importance of explaining and acknowledging the minimal but present risk of radiation-induced cancer from diagnostic procedures, and informed consent before patients undergo radiation exposure.
References
Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52(4): 707-30.
Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Bumann A, Visser H, Hirsch E. Cone-beam computed tomography for routine orthodontic treatment planning: a radiation dose evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133(5): 640.e1-5.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Cone beam computed tomography: a paradigm shift for clinical dentistry. Aust Dent Pract 2008; 19: 102-6.
Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30(6): 1088-95.
Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Kilic C. Cone beam computed tomography in dentistry: a review. Clinics 2011; 66(6): 1073-81.
De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GRJ. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: A systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 38(6): 609-25.
Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 3rd ed. Mosby: St. Louis; 2011.
Kapila S, Conley RS, Harrell WE Jr. The current status of cone beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40(1): 24-34.
Patel S, Horner K, Wilson R. The use of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics. Int Endod J 2009; 42(9): 755-73.
Loubele M, Maes F, Jacobs R, Schutyser F, Suetens P. Comparative localized bone qualityassessment based on cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20(4): 520-5.
Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Bosmans H. Modern dental imaging: A review of the current technology and clinical applications in dental practice. Eur Radiol 2010; 20(11): 2637-55.
Tyndall DA, Rathore S. Cone-beam CT diagnostic applications: Caries, periodontal bone assessment, and endodontic applications. Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52(4): 825-41.
Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81(2): 267-71.
Dunne-Daly CF. Principles of radiotherapy. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 1999; 74: C166-9.
Borrego-Soto G, Ortiz-López R, Rojas-Martínez A. Ionizing radiation-induced DNA injury and damage detection in patients with breast cancer. Genet Mol Biol 2015; 38(4): 420-32.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). ICRP Publication 152. Annals of the ICRP 2022; 51(3): 1-3.
Cardis E, Howe G, Ron E, Bebeshko V, Bogdanova T, Bouville A, et al. Cancer consequences of the Chernobyl accident: 20 years on. J Radiol Prot 2006; 26: 127-40.
Food and Drug Administration. What are the radiation risks from CT? [online]. 2017; [cited 2022 Nov 4]: [4 screens]. Available from: URL: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/medical-x-ray-imaging/what-are-radiation-risks-ct.
International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans volume 75, part 1: X- and gamma -radiation, and neutrons. [online]. 2000; [cited 2022 Nov 4]. Available from: https://publications.iarc.fr/93.
Linet MS, Slovis TL, Miller DL, Kleinerman R, Lee C, Rajaraman P, et al. Cancer risks associated with external radiation from diagnostic imaging procedures. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62: 75-100.
Claus EB, Calvocoressi L, Bondy ML, Schildkraut JM, Wiemels JL, Wrensch M. Dental x-rays and risk of meningioma. Cancer 2012; 118(18): 4530-7.
Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the radiologist. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation: health effects. [online]. 2023; [cited 2024 Nov 27]. Available from: URL: https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-health-effects.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007; 37(2-4): 1-332.
Al Najjar A, Colosi D, Dauer LT, Prins R, Patchell G, Branets I, et al. Comparison of adult and child radiation equivalent doses from 2 dental cone-beam computed tomography units. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2013; 143(6): 784-92.
Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 106(1): 106-14.
Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81(2): 267–71.
Ludlow JB, Walker C. Assessment of phantom dosimetry and image quality of i-CAT FLX cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2013; 144(6): 802-17.
Al-Okshi A, Nilsson M, Petersson A, Wiese M, Lindh C. Using GafChromic film to estimate the effective dose from dental cone beam CT and panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42(7): 20120343. (8 pages).
Koivisto J, Kiljunen T, Tapiovaara M, Wolff J, Kortesniemi M. Assessment of radiation exposure in dental cone-beam computerized tomography with the use of metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET) dosimeters and Monte Carlo simulations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 114(3): 393-400.
Lee C, Lee SS, Kim JE, Huh KH, Yi WJ, Heo MS, et al. Comparison of dosimetry methods for panoramic radiography: thermoluminescent dosimeter measurement versus personal computer–based Monte Carlo method calculation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2016; 121(3): 322-9.
Servomaa A, Tapiovaara M. Organ dose calculation in medical x-ray examinations by the program PCXMC. Radiat Prot Dosim 1998; 80(1-3): 213-9.
Khelassi-Toutaoui N, Berkani Y, Tsapaki V, Toutaoui AE, Merad A, Frahi-Amroun A, et al. Experimental evaluation of PCXMC and prepare codes used in conventional radiology. Radiat Prot Dosim 2008; 131(3): 374-8.
Tapiovaara M, Lakkisto M, Servomaa A. A PC-based Monte Carlo program for calculating patient doses in medical x-ray examinations. In: Report STUK-A139. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety; 1997. p. 5-25.
Tapiovaara M. PCXMC 2.0 supplementary programs user’s guide. Helsinki, Finland: STUK; 2012.
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32: 229-34.
Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 245-8.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52: 707-30.
Kadesjö N, Lynds R, Nilsson M, Shi XQ. Radiation dose from X-ray examinations of impacted canines: cone beam CT vs two-dimensional imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2018; 47(3): 20170305. (9 pages).
Roberts J, Drage N, Davies J, Thomas D. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry. Br J Radiol 2009; 82(973): 35-40.
Lorenzoni DC, Bolognese AM, Garib DG, Guedes FR, Sant'anna EF. Cone-beam computed tomography and radiographs in dentistry: aspects related to radiation dose. Int J Dent 2012; 2012: 813768. (10 pages).
Ludlow J, Davies-Ludlow L, Brooks S. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos plus DS panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32(4): 229-34.
Garcia Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Gründler K, Visser H, Hirsch E. Effective dosages for recording Veraviewepocs dental panoramic images: analog film, digital, and panoramic scout for CBCT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 106(4): 571-77.
Chinem LA, Vilella Bde S, Maurício CL, Canevaro LV, Deluiz LF, Vilella Ode V. Digital orthodontic radiographic set versus cone-beam computed tomography: an evaluation of the effective dose. Dent Press J Orthod 2016; 21(4): 66-72.
Sedentexct. Brussels: Sedentexct 2020-2021. [online]. 2021; [cited 2024 Nov 27]. Available from: URL: https://sedentexct.eu/content/basicprinciples-use-dental-cone-beam-ct.html.
Farman AG, Feuerstein P, Levato CM. Using CBCT in the general practice. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2011; 32(2): 14-6.
Longstreth WT Jr, Phillips LE, Drangsholt M, Koepsell TD, Custer BS, Gehrels JA, et al. Dental x-rays and the risk of intracranial Meningioma: a population-based case-control study. Cancer 2004; 100(5): 1026-34.
Preston-Martin S, Paganini-Hill A, Henderson BE, Pike MC, Wood C. Case control study of intracranial meningiomas in women in Los Angeles County, California. J Natl Cancer Inst 1980; 65(1): 67-73.
Zamani H, Falahati F, Omidi R, Abedi Firouzjah R, Zare M, Momeni F. Estimating and comparing the radiation cancer risk from cone-beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in pediatric and adult patients. Int J Radiat Res 2020; 18(4): 885-93.
Jha N, Kim YJ, Lee Y, Lee JY, Lee WJ, Sung SJ. Projected lifetime cancer risk from cone-beam computed tomography for orthodontic treatment. Korean J Orthod 2021; 51(3): 189-98.
Pauwels R, Cockmartin L, Ivanauskaité D, Urboniene A, Gavala S, Donta C, et al. Estimating cancer risk from dental cone-beam CT exposures based on skin dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 2014; 59: 3877-91.
Yeh JK, Chen CH. Estimated radiation risk of cancer from dental cone-beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics patients. BMC Oral Health 2018; 18: 131. (8 pages).
Stratis A, Zhang G, Jacobs R, Bogaerts R, Bosmans H. The growing concern of radiation dose in paediatric dental and maxillofacial CBCT: an easy guide for daily practice. Eur Radiol 2019; 29: 7009-18.
Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E, Pauwels R, Vanheusden S, Suetens P, et al. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol 2009; 71: 461-8.
European Academy of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. Guidelines for the use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Dentistry. [online]. 2019; [cited 2024 Nov 27]. Available from: URL: https://eadmfr.eu/eadmfr-cbct-guidelines.
Pauwels R, Theodorakou C, Walker A, Bosmans H, Jacobs R, Horner K, et al. Dose distribution for dental cone beam CT and its implication for defining a dose index. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41(7): 583-93.
Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, White SC. Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139(9): 1237-43.
Kamburoglu K, Yüksel S. A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector CT and cone beam CT in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011; 40(7): 466-7.
Kaaber L, Matzen LH, Schropp L, Spin-Neto R. Low-dose CBCT protocols in implant dentistry: a systematic review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2024; 138(3): 427-39.
de Castro HS, Kehrwald R, Matheus RA, Gomes AF, Queiroz PM. Influence of low-dose protocols of CBCT on dental implant planning. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2021; 36: 307-12.
Al-Ekrish AA. Effect of exposure time on the accuracy and reliability of cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions in dry skulls. Saudi Dent J 2012; 24: 127-34.
Scarfe WC, Li Z, Aboelmaaty W, Scott SA, Farman AG. Maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography: essence, elements and steps to interpretation. Aust Dent J 2012; 57(suppl 1): 46-60.
Nair PN, Nair RS. Informed Consent in Dentistry: A Review. J Clin Diagn Res 2019; 13(9): ZE01-3.
กรมวิทยาศาสตร์การแพทย์. แนวทางการดําเนินงานการขออนุญาตห้องปฏิบัติการรังสีวินิจฉัยทางการแพทย์. [ออนไลน์]. 2565; [สืบค้น 27 พ.ย. 2567]: [92 หน้า]. เข้าถึงได้จาก: URL: https://webapp1.dmsc.moph.go.th/petitionxray/web3/download/XrayTotal.pdf.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
