The Perceptibility Ccurve Test Applied to CCD and Two Methods of Digitization of Dental Film-based Radiographs
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 34 No. 1 (2016),
27 February 2016
,
Page 44-50
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v34i1.24688
Abstract
Objectives: Several methods of image acquisition are accessible in dentistry. There is no overall acceptable method for image digitization so all different types of images can be comparable. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of different methods of image digitization.
Methods: This accuracy diagnostic test study used perceptibility curve test which first introduced by de Balder was applied. In this test a test object is used which is usually made by aluminum. Different levels of thickness and number of holes in the test object were necessary to have different levels of contrast. Images from film and CCD and digitized images by means of CCD scanners and digital camera were prepared. Nine observers assessed the images. Data collected was delivered to SPSS 13 software and for each image acquisition method, interclass correlation coefficience was computed and compared to the gold standard.
Results: Mean sensitivity, specifity, positive and negative like hood ratios in dependence on material thickness and the background gray value were calculated. In regions of high optical density the sensitivity for the film images was highest (0.994) following by CCD (0.905), scanner (0.889) and camera (0.821). Difference between CCD images and scanner images was not significant. In dark regions of no dark holes the sensitivity was highest for film images (0.832) following by CCD (0.798), camera (0.714) and scanner (0.615) Difference between film and CCD images was not significant.
Conclusion: The diagnostic quality of radiographic films was better than digital CCD sensors. For digitizing analog images scanners were better than digital cameras.
- Dental
- Digital
- Radiography
- ROC Curve
How to Cite
References
Grassl U, Schulze RKW. In vitro perception of low-contrast features in digital, film, and digitized dental radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 May;103(5):694-701.
Prapayasatok S, Janhom A, Verochana K, Pramojanee S. Digital camera resolution and proximal caries detection. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2006; 35:253-7.
Farman AG. Farman TT. A comparison of 18 diiferent x-ray detectors currently used in dentistry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Apr ;99(4):485-9.
Borg E, Grondahl K, Grondahl HG. Marginal bone level buccal to mandibular molars in digital radiographs from charge-coupleddevice and storage phosphor systems. An in vitro study. J Clin Periodontol. 1997 May ; 24(5):306-12.
Mistak EJ, Loushine RJ, Primack PD, West LA, Runyan DA. Interpretation of periapical lesions comparing conventional, direct digital and telephonically transmitted radiographic images. J Endod. 1998 Apr ; 24(4):262-6.
Nikneshan S, Abbas FM, Sabbagh S. Detection of proximal caries using digital radiographic systems with different resolutions. Indian J Dent Res. 2015 May;26(1): 5-10.
Vasconcelos TV, Santaella GM, Nascimento HA, Rovaris K, Ambrosano GM, Freitas DQ. Digital radiographs displayed on different devices: effect on the detection of vertical root fractures. Int Endontic J. 2016; 49(4): 386-92.
Nascimento HA, Neves FS, de-Azevedo-Vaz Duque TM3, Ambrosano GM, Freitas DQ. Impact of root fillings and posts on the diagnostic ability of three intra-oral digitalradiographic systems in detecting vertical root fractures. Int Endod J. 2015 Sep;48(9):864-71.
YoshiuraK, Stamatakis H, Shi XQ, Welander U, McDavid WD, Kristofferson J, et al. The perceptibility curve test applied to direct dental digital radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1998; 27:131-5.
Attaelmanan A, Borg E, Grondahl HG. Digitization and display of intraoral films. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000 Mar;29(2):97-102.
Hangiandreou NJ, O Connor TJ, Felmlee JP. An evaluation of the signal and noise charactristics of four CCD-based film digitizers. Med Phys. 1998 Oct;25(10):2020-6.
Janhom A, van Ginkel FC, van Amerongen JP, van der Stelt PF.Scanning resolution and the detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. (2001);30;166-71.
Versteeg CH, Sanderink GC, GeraetsWG. Van der Setll PF. Impact of scale standardization on images of digital radiography systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1997 Nov;26(6):337-43.
Schulze RK, Rosing ST, D Hoedt B. Contrast perception in digitized panoramic radiographs compared with their film-based origin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002 Sep;94(3):338-94.
Haak R, Wicht MJ, Noack MJ. Conventional, digital and contrast-enhanced bitewing radiographs in the decision to restore proximal caries lesion. Caries Res 2001;35(3):193–9.
Fuge KN, Stuck AM, Love RM. A comparison of digitally Scanned radiographs with conventional film for the detection of small endodontic instruments. In Endod J. 1998 Mar;31(2):123-6.
Syriopoulos K, Sanderink GC, Velders XL, Yan der Stelt PE. Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison of dental films and digital imaging systems. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2000;29,312–8.
Yoshiura K, Kawazu T, Chikui T, Tatsumi M, Tokumori K, Tanaka T, et al. Assessment of image quality in dental radiography, part 1: phantom validity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;87(1):115-22.
Parissis N, Kondylidou-Sidira A, Tsirlis A, Patias P. Conventional radiographs vs digitized radiographs: image quality assessment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2005 Mar;34(6):353-6.
Shrout MK, Potter BJ, Yurgalavage HM, Hildebolt CF, Vannier MW. 35-mm film scanner as an intraoral dental radiograph digitizer I : A quantitative evaluation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993 Oct;76(4):502-9.
Davidson HC, Johnston DJ, Christian ME, Harnsberger HR. Comparison of radiographic image quality from four digitization devices as viewed on computer monitors. J Digit Imaging. 2001 Mar;14:24-29.
- Abstract Viewed: 176 times
- PDF Downloaded: 128 times