A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures

Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The ext...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Lang, H. [verfasserIn] Neubauer, J. Fritz, B. Spira, E. M. Strube, J. Langer, M. Kotter, E.

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2016

Schlagwörter:	Multislice computed tomography Cone beam computed tomography Musculoskeletal system Radius fracture Orthopaedics

Anmerkung:	© European Society of Radiology 2016

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: European radiology - Berlin : Springer, 1991, 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:26 ; year:2016 ; number:12 ; day:22 ; month:03 ; pages:4551-4561

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7

Katalog-ID:	SPR004022580

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR004022580
003	DE-627
005	20230519234903.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201001s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR004022580
035			\|a (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Lang, H. \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	2	\|a A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
264		1	\|c 2016
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © European Society of Radiology 2016
520			\|a Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales.
650		4	\|a Multislice computed tomography \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Cone beam computed tomography \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Musculoskeletal system \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Radius fracture \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Orthopaedics \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Neubauer, J. \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Fritz, B. \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Spira, E. M. \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Strube, J. \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Langer, M. \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Kotter, E. \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t European radiology \|d Berlin : Springer, 1991 \|g 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 \|w (DE-627)268757526 \|w (DE-600)1472718-3 \|x 1432-1084 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:26 \|g year:2016 \|g number:12 \|g day:22 \|g month:03 \|g pages:4551-4561
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_32
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_90
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_100
912			\|a GBV_ILN_101
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_120
912			\|a GBV_ILN_138
912			\|a GBV_ILN_150
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_171
912			\|a GBV_ILN_187
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_224
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_250
912			\|a GBV_ILN_267
912			\|a GBV_ILN_281
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_636
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_711
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2001
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2004
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2008
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2015
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2021
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2025
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2026
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2031
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2034
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2038
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2039
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2044
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2048
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2049
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2050
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2057
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2059
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2061
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2064
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2065
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2068
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2070
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2086
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2088
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2093
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2106
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2107
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2108
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2113
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2116
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2118
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2119
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2122
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2129
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2143
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2144
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2147
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2148
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2153
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2188
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2232
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2336
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2446
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2470
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2472
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2507
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2522
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2548
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4035
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4046
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4242
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4246
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4251
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4328
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4333
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4334
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4336
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4393
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 26 \|j 2016 \|e 12 \|b 22 \|c 03 \|h 4551-4561

Indexfelder

author_variant	h l hl j n jn b f bf e m s em ems j s js m l ml e k ek
matchkey_str	article:14321084:2016----::rtopcieeiuniaiemgqaiynlssfoeemoptdoorpybtnmcit
hierarchy_sort_str	2016
publishDate	2016
allfields	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 doi (DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lang, H. verfasserin aut A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © European Society of Radiology 2016 Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Neubauer, J. aut Fritz, B. aut Spira, E. M. aut Strube, J. aut Langer, M. aut Kotter, E. aut Enthalten in European radiology Berlin : Springer, 1991 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 (DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3 1432-1084 nnns volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2016 12 22 03 4551-4561
spelling	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 doi (DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lang, H. verfasserin aut A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © European Society of Radiology 2016 Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Neubauer, J. aut Fritz, B. aut Spira, E. M. aut Strube, J. aut Langer, M. aut Kotter, E. aut Enthalten in European radiology Berlin : Springer, 1991 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 (DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3 1432-1084 nnns volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2016 12 22 03 4551-4561
allfields_unstemmed	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 doi (DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lang, H. verfasserin aut A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © European Society of Radiology 2016 Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Neubauer, J. aut Fritz, B. aut Spira, E. M. aut Strube, J. aut Langer, M. aut Kotter, E. aut Enthalten in European radiology Berlin : Springer, 1991 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 (DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3 1432-1084 nnns volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2016 12 22 03 4551-4561
allfieldsGer	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 doi (DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lang, H. verfasserin aut A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © European Society of Radiology 2016 Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Neubauer, J. aut Fritz, B. aut Spira, E. M. aut Strube, J. aut Langer, M. aut Kotter, E. aut Enthalten in European radiology Berlin : Springer, 1991 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 (DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3 1432-1084 nnns volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2016 12 22 03 4551-4561
allfieldsSound	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 doi (DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lang, H. verfasserin aut A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © European Society of Radiology 2016 Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Neubauer, J. aut Fritz, B. aut Spira, E. M. aut Strube, J. aut Langer, M. aut Kotter, E. aut Enthalten in European radiology Berlin : Springer, 1991 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 (DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3 1432-1084 nnns volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2016 12 22 03 4551-4561
language	English
source	Enthalten in European radiology 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561
sourceStr	Enthalten in European radiology 26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561 volume:26 year:2016 number:12 day:22 month:03 pages:4551-4561
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Multislice computed tomography Cone beam computed tomography Musculoskeletal system Radius fracture Orthopaedics
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	European radiology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Lang, H. @@aut@@ Neubauer, J. @@aut@@ Fritz, B. @@aut@@ Spira, E. M. @@aut@@ Strube, J. @@aut@@ Langer, M. @@aut@@ Kotter, E. @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2016-03-22T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	268757526
id	SPR004022580
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR004022580</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519234903.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR004022580</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lang, H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© European Society of Radiology 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multislice computed tomography</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cone beam computed tomography</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Musculoskeletal system</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radius fracture</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Orthopaedics</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Neubauer, J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fritz, B.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Spira, E. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Strube, J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langer, M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kotter, E.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European radiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 1991</subfield><subfield code="g">26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)268757526</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1472718-3</subfield><subfield code="x">1432-1084</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:26</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:12</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4551-4561</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">26</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">12</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">4551-4561</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Lang, H.
spellingShingle	Lang, H. misc Multislice computed tomography misc Cone beam computed tomography misc Musculoskeletal system misc Radius fracture misc Orthopaedics A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
authorStr	Lang, H.
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)268757526
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1432-1084
topic_title	A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures Multislice computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cone beam computed tomography (dpeaa)DE-He213 Musculoskeletal system (dpeaa)DE-He213 Radius fracture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Orthopaedics (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Multislice computed tomography misc Cone beam computed tomography misc Musculoskeletal system misc Radius fracture misc Orthopaedics
topic_unstemmed	misc Multislice computed tomography misc Cone beam computed tomography misc Musculoskeletal system misc Radius fracture misc Orthopaedics
topic_browse	misc Multislice computed tomography misc Cone beam computed tomography misc Musculoskeletal system misc Radius fracture misc Orthopaedics
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	European radiology
hierarchy_parent_id	268757526
hierarchy_top_title	European radiology
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)268757526 (DE-600)1472718-3
title	A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR004022580 (SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e
title_full	A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
author_sort	Lang, H.
journal	European radiology
journalStr	European radiology
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2016
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	4551
author_browse	Lang, H. Neubauer, J. Fritz, B. Spira, E. M. Strube, J. Langer, M. Kotter, E.
container_volume	26
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Lang, H.
doi_str_mv	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7
title_sort	retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (cbct) and msct in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
title_auth	A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
abstract	Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. © European Society of Radiology 2016
abstractGer	Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. © European Society of Radiology 2016
abstract_unstemmed	Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales. © European Society of Radiology 2016
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	12
title_short	A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7
remote_bool	true
author2	Neubauer, J. Fritz, B. Spira, E. M. Strube, J. Langer, M. Kotter, E.
author2Str	Neubauer, J. Fritz, B. Spira, E. M. Strube, J. Langer, M. Kotter, E.
ppnlink	268757526
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7
up_date	2024-07-03T23:10:49.213Z
_version_	1803601312969916416
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR004022580</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519234903.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR004022580</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00330-016-4321-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lang, H.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© European Society of Radiology 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objective To compare image quality and diagnostic validity of CBCT and MSCT for distal radius fractures. Methods 35 CBCT and 33 MSCT scans were retrospectively reviewed with a visual grading scale regarding the depiction of cortical bone, trabecular bone, articular surfaces, and soft tissue. The extent and type of artefacts was analyzed. Agreement on AO classification and measurement of cortical disruption and length of the fracture gap was determined. Fracture reduction was evaluated in post-treatment x-rays. Statistical analysis was performed with visual grading characteristics (VGC), chi square tests, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. Results CBCT performed significantly worse for cortical bone, articular surfaces, and especially soft tissue. Trabecular bone showed no significant difference. Significantly more CBCT images showed artefacts. Physics-based artefacts were the most common. CBCT scans also showed motion artefacts. There was no significant difference in agreement on AO classification. The agreement on measurements was substantial for both modalities. Slightly more fractures that had undergone MSCT imaging showed adequate reduction. Conclusion This initial study of an orthopaedic extremity CBCT scanner showed that the image quality of a CBCT scanner remains inferior for most structures at standard settings. Diagnostic validity of both modalities for distal radius fractures seems similar. Key Points • Subjectively, CBCT remains inferior to MSCT in depicting most structures. • Similar diagnostic validity for CBCT and MSCT imaging of distal radius fractures. • CBCT is a possible alternative to MSCT in musculoskeletal imaging. • Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis proves useful in analyzing visual grading scales.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multislice computed tomography</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cone beam computed tomography</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Musculoskeletal system</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radius fracture</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Orthopaedics</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Neubauer, J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fritz, B.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Spira, E. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Strube, J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langer, M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kotter, E.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European radiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 1991</subfield><subfield code="g">26(2016), 12 vom: 22. März, Seite 4551-4561</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)268757526</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1472718-3</subfield><subfield code="x">1432-1084</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:26</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:12</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4551-4561</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4321-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">26</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">12</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">4551-4561</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4015017

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

A retrospective, semi-quantitative image quality analysis of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and MSCT in the diagnosis of distal radius fractures

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?