Literature DB >> 17321456

Influence of spatial resolution and bit depth on detection of small caries lesions with digital receptors.

Ann Wenzel1, Francisco Haiter-Neto, Erik Gotfredsen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the caries diagnostic accuracy among intraoral digital receptor systems that provide images in more than one resolution and bit depth. STUDY
DESIGN: Eighty noncavitated extracted human teeth were radiographed and analyzed by the following digital systems: Digora Optime (Soredex) 8-bit high- and 8-bit super-resolution, VistaScan (Dürr) 8-bit high- and 8-bit max-resolution and 16-bit high- and 16-bit max-resolution, Dixi2 (Planmeca) 8-bit and 12-bit depths. Insight Film was included as a reference. Six observers scored caries lesions in each tooth surface. The teeth were sectioned and microscopy served as validation. Two-way analysis of variance tested differences in sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy (true positives + true negatives) between the modalities.
RESULTS: There were 160 approximal surfaces examined, and histology showed 63% sound, 31% enamel, and 6% dentinal lesions. Sensitivity was not significantly different within each brand except for VistaScan 8-bit max-resolution, which showed higher sensitivity than the 2 VistaScan high-resolution modalities (P = .003). Digora super-resolution showed higher sensitivity than almost all the other modalities (P < .02), but had lower specificity than all other systems, among which there were no differences. Overall accuracy was significantly lower for Digora high-resolution than for Dixi2 and VistaScan max-resolution modalities (P < .03); there were no differences among the other modalities.
CONCLUSION: Caries diagnostic accuracy seems to be little influenced by an increase in spatial resolution and bit depth from 8-bit to 12- or 16-bit within digital radiographic system brands. Between systems, the Digora super-resolution images provided higher sensitivity, but lower specificity than most of the other receptors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17321456     DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.05.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod        ISSN: 1079-2104


  24 in total

1.  Image resolution and exposure time of digital radiographs affects fractal dimension of periapical bone.

Authors:  B Güniz Baksi; Aleš Fidler
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  A comprehensive in vitro study of image accuracy and quality for periodontal diagnosis. Part 2: the influence of intra-oral image receptor on periodontal measurements.

Authors:  Bart Vandenberghe; Hilde Bosmans; Jie Yang; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Evaluation of proximal caries in images resulting from different modes of radiographic digitalization.

Authors:  C R G Xavier; Ana Claudia Araujo-Pires; M L Poleti; I R F Rubira-Bullen; O Ferreira; A L A Capelozza
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Comparison of changes in dental and bone radiographic densities in the presence of different soft-tissue simulators using pixel intensity and digital subtraction analyses.

Authors:  R S de Molon; R G Batitucci; R Spin-Neto; G M Paquier; C E Sakakura; G M Tosoni; G Scaf
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Enterprise-wide implementation of digital radiography in oral and maxillofacial imaging: the University of Florida Dentistry System.

Authors:  Madhu K Nair; James C Pettigrew; Jeffrey S Loomis; Robert E Bates; Stephen Kostewicz; Boyd Robinson; Jean Sweitzer; Teresa A Dolan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-09-03       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Influence of materials radiopacity in the radiographic diagnosis of secondary caries: evaluation in film and two digital systems.

Authors:  Ricardo Ferreira Pedrosa; I V Brasileiro; M L dos Anjos Pontual; A dos Anjos Pontual; M M F da Silveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.419

7.  DICOM part 14: GSDF-calibrated medical grade monitor vs a DICOM part 14: GSDF-calibrated "commercial off-the-shelf" (COTS) monitor for viewing 8-bit dental images.

Authors:  D J McIlgorm; J P McNulty
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  Influence of the image file format of digital periapical radiographs on the diagnosis of external and internal root resorptions.

Authors:  Murilo Miranda-Viana; Daniela Verardi Madlum; Nicolly Oliveira-Santos; Hugo Gaêta-Araujo; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Matheus L Oliveira
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Validity of wax and acrylic as soft-tissue simulation materials used in in vitro radiographic studies.

Authors:  L Schropp; N S Alyass; A Wenzel; A Stavropoulos
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2012-08-29       Impact factor: 2.419

10.  A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of in vivo and in vitro photostimulable phosphor digital images in the detection of occlusal caries lesions.

Authors:  K Kamburoglu; B Senel; S P Yüksel; T Ozen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.419

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.