The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study provides effective dose measurements for two extraoral direct digital imaging devices, the NewTom 9000 cone beam CT (CBCT) unit and the Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit. METHODS: Thermoluminescent dosemeters were placed at 20 sites throughout the layers of the head and neck of a tissue-equivalent RANDO phantom. Variations in phantom orientation and beam collimation were used to create three different CBCT examination techniques: a combined maxillary and mandibular scan (Max/Man), a maxillary scan and a mandibular scan. Ten exposures for each technique were used to ensure a reliable measure of radiation from the dosemeters. Average tissue-absorbed dose, weighted equivalent dose and effective dose were calculated for each major anatomical site. Effective doses of individual organs were summed with salivary gland exposures (E(SAL)) and without salivary gland exposures (E(ICRP60)) to calculate two measures of whole-body effective dose. RESULTS: The effective doses for CBCT were: Max/Man scan, E(ICRP60)=36.3 micro Sv, E(SAL)=77.9 micro Sv; maxillary scan, E(ICRP60)=19.9 micro Sv, E(SAL)=41.5 micro Sv; and mandibular scan, E(ICRP60)=34.7 micro Sv, E(SAL)=74.7 micro Sv. Effective doses for the panoramic examination were E(ICRP60)=6.2 micro Sv and E(SAL)=22.0 micro Sv. CONCLUSION: When viewed in the context of potential diagnostic yield, the E(ICRP60) of 36.3 micro Sv for the NewTom compares favourably with published effective doses for conventional CT (314 micro Sv) and film tomography (2-9 micro Sv per image). CBCT examinations resulted in doses that were 3-7 (E(ICRP60)) and 2-4 (E(SAL)) times the panoramic doses observed in this study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology
Ludlow, J. B., & Ivanovic, M. (2008) · Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology · doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.018 · Cited by 872
Self-citationDosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT
Ludlow, J., Davies-Ludlow, L., Brooks, S., & Howerton, W. (2006) · Dentomaxillofacial Radiology · doi:10.1259/dmfr/14340323 · Cited by 851
Self-citationSuperimposition of 3D cone-beam CT models of orthognathic surgery patients
Cevidanes, L., Bailey, L., Tucker, G., Styner, M., Mol, A., Phillips, C., Proffit, W., & Turvey, T. (2005) · Dentomaxillofacial Radiology · doi:10.1259/dmfr/17102411 · Cited by 373
Image analysis and superimposition of 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography models
Cevidanes, L. H. S., Styner, M. A., & Proffit, W. R. (2006) · American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics · doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.008 · Cited by 358
Evaluation of cross-section airway configuration of obstructive sleep apnea
Ogawa, T., Enciso, R., Shintaku, W. H., & Clark, G. T. (2007) · Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology · doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.06.008 · Cited by 271
Metadata
- Authors
- Ludlow, J., Davies-Ludlow, L., & Brooks, S.
- Venue
- Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-07
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 229-234
- ISSN
- 0250-832X (ISSN-L)
- 1476-542X
- OpenAlex
- W2074097278
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1259/dmfr/26310390
- The paper
- Ludlow, J., Davies-Ludlow, L., & Brooks, S. (2003). Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/26310390
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.