PGs and SMGs were delineated on pre-treatment planning CTs (Toshiba Aquilion/LB, 120 kV, voxel size: 1.074 × 1.074 × 3.0 mm3) according to the same contouring protocols as van Dijk et al. [35] (link), [36] .
To avoid analysing CT intensity values that do not correspond to tissue densities [37] (link), [38] (link), van Dijk et al excluded 33 % of their patients as they presented with metal artefacts on their CT scans. Implementing the same approach in our cohort, would have resulted in the exclusion of 95 % (104/109) of the patients and was therefore not undertaken. This difference is remarkable and the proportion of patients with dental implants in our cohort is similar to the one reported by the NIH National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research with 92 % of adults who have had dental caries in their permanent teeth [39] .
To avoid analysing CT intensity values that do not correspond to tissue densities [37] (link), [38] (link), van Dijk et al excluded 33 % of their patients as they presented with metal artefacts on their CT scans. Implementing the same approach in our cohort, would have resulted in the exclusion of 95 % (104/109) of the patients and was therefore not undertaken. This difference is remarkable and the proportion of patients with dental implants in our cohort is similar to the one reported by the NIH National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research with 92 % of adults who have had dental caries in their permanent teeth [39] .
Free full text: Click here
