M Abreu1, D A Tyndall, J B Ludlow. 1. Department of Stomatology, Federal University of Santa Catarina School of Dentistry, Florianopolis, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of conventional digital images and tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT) slices in caries detection through use of cathode-ray tube monitor and laptop displays. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-two extracted posterior teeth were mounted and imaged with a direct digital radiography system. Conventional digital bitewing projections and TACT slices were acquired. Images were viewed on a high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitor and on an active-matrix laptop display. Eight observers assessed caries status of occlusal and proximal surfaces of the teeth using all combinations of image and display modality. Observers' assessments were compared with the results of histologic examination of tooth sections. Possible differences in receiver operating characteristic curve areas among displays, image modalities, observers, and surfaces were analyzed by means of analysis of variance. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic performances provided by the cathode-ray tube monitor and laptop displays in caries detection (P = .588). In addition, the performances of digital images and TACT slices were not significantly different (P = .843). CONCLUSIONS: Modern active-matrix laptop displays provide diagnostic quality for caries detection comparable to that obtainable with cathode-ray tube monitors.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of conventional digital images and tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT) slices in caries detection through use of cathode-ray tube monitor and laptop displays. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-two extracted posterior teeth were mounted and imaged with a direct digital radiography system. Conventional digital bitewing projections and TACT slices were acquired. Images were viewed on a high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitor and on an active-matrix laptop display. Eight observers assessed caries status of occlusal and proximal surfaces of the teeth using all combinations of image and display modality. Observers' assessments were compared with the results of histologic examination of tooth sections. Possible differences in receiver operating characteristic curve areas among displays, image modalities, observers, and surfaces were analyzed by means of analysis of variance. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic performances provided by the cathode-ray tube monitor and laptop displays in caries detection (P = .588). In addition, the performances of digital images and TACT slices were not significantly different (P = .843). CONCLUSIONS: Modern active-matrix laptop displays provide diagnostic quality for caries detection comparable to that obtainable with cathode-ray tube monitors.