Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 25;49(8):20200039. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20200039

Table 3.

Mean, standard deviation, percentage and confidence interval of volumetric distortion according to material, MAR activation. and windowing adjustment obtained for the two CBCT units

CBCT unit Mean (SD), mm³ Percentage, % 95% CI
Picasso Trio Material Am 17.82 (6.7) 14.58 (15.87–19.87)
CoCr 11.17 (5.79) 8.64 (9.49–12.86)
Gu −0.04 (13.57) 0.03 (-3.98–3.89)
Ti 1.12 (12.99) 0.86 (-2.64–4.9)
Zi 13.31 (7.68) 10.78 (11.08–15.55)
MAR Off 13.53 (9.66) 10.58 (11.57–15.49)
On 1.50 (11.16) 1.17 (-1.03–4.04)
Windowing W1 3.96 (10.27) 3.10 (2.10–5.81)
W2 13.4 (11.91) 10.48 (11.24–15.55)
OP300 Material Am 52.32 (10.5) 42.80 (49.27–55.37)
CoCr 47.47 (11.58) 36.72 (44.1–50.83)
Gu 33.56 (7.82) 25.17 (31.29–35.83)
Ti 37.93 (10.82) 28.99 (34.79–41.07)
Zi 49.62 (10.47) 40.19 (46.58–52.66)
MAR Off 37.33 (7.58) 29.20 (35.79–38.87)
On 48.31 (14.23) 37.79 (45.42–51.19)
Windowing W1 38.81 (11.24) 30.36 (36.78–40.85)
W2 49.54 (11.4) 38.75 (47.48–51.61)

Am, amalgam alloy; CBCT, cone-beam computed tomography; CI, confidence interval; CoCr, cobalt-chromium; Gu, gutta-percha; MAR, metal artefact reduction; SD, standard deviation; Ti, titanium; W1, large window width and upper window level; W2, narrow window width and low window level; Zi, zirconium.

Bold numbers indicate the lowest descriptive values of volumetric distortion considering each condition.