Literature DB >> 20841460

Perception of anatomical structures in digitally filtered and conventional panoramic radiographs: a clinical evaluation.

B G Baksi1, E Alpöz, E Sogur, A Mert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to compare subjective image quality of clinical images obtained with a storage phosphor plate (SPP)-based digital and conventional film-based panoramic system for the visualization of various anatomical structures and to evaluate the effect of various processing algorithms on image interpretation.
METHODS: Panoramic radiographs were taken in 42 patients both with film and with a SPP system. SPP images were treated with shadow, sharpen, negative, greyscale sigma and greyscale exponential filters. Four observers subjectively evaluated films and unfiltered and filtered SPP images for the visibility of anatomical structures with various radiodensities as well as for overall image quality on a three-point rating scale. The statistical methods used were Kruskal-Wallis, odds ratio analysis and Cohen's kappa.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between film and unfiltered digital images except for low-contrast structures (P > 0.05). Film images were preferred for the visibility of low-contrast structures (P < 0.05). Best overall image quality was obtained with sharpened images (P < 0.05) followed by films and unfiltered digital images. Among all filtered images, sharpened ones received the highest ratings for the visibility of all anatomical structures (P < 0.05). The intra- and interobserver agreement ranged between moderate and substantial and between fair and moderate, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Film and unfiltered SPP-based panoramic images performed equally well in terms of overall quality; however, films were best for the perception of low-contrast structures. The sharpening filter may be recommended for enhancing SPP panoramic images to improve the visual perception of most of the anatomical structures as well as overall quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20841460      PMCID: PMC3520188          DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/30570374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol        ISSN: 0250-832X            Impact factor:   2.419


  26 in total

1.  The subjective image quality of direct digital and conventional panoramic radiography.

Authors:  F Gijbels; A M De Meyer; C Bou Serhal; C Van den Bossche; J Declerck; M Persoons; R Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Digital radiography of interproximal bone loss; validity of different filters.

Authors:  P Eickholz; T Riess; M Lenhard; S Hassfeld; H J Staehle
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 8.728

3.  Evaluation of a new digital panoramic system: a comparison with film.

Authors:  A Ramesh; D A Tyndall; J B Ludlow
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Single-exposure conventional and computed radiography image acquisition.

Authors:  H G Chotas; J T Dobbins; C E Floyd; C E Ravin
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 6.016

5.  Direct comparison of conventional and computed radiography with a dual-image recording technique.

Authors:  H MacMahon; S Sanada; K Doi; M Giger; X W Xu; F F Yin; S M Montner; M Carlin
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Detection of subtle microcalcifications: comparison of computed radiography and screen-film mammography.

Authors:  Y Higashida; N Moribe; K Morita; N Katsuda; M Hatemura; T Takada; M Takahashi; J Yamashita
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Enhanced visualization methods for computed radiography images.

Authors:  Cristian Bonciu; Mahmoud R Rezaee; Warren Edwards
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Subjective image quality of digitally filtered radiographs acquired by the Dürr Vistascan system compared with conventional radiographs.

Authors:  S Yalcinkaya; A Künzel; R Willers; M Thoms; J Becker
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2006-01-19

9.  The subjective image quality of conventional and digital panoramic radiography among 6 to 10 year old children.

Authors:  N Makris; K Tsiklakis; K E Alexiou; A M Vierrou; Th Stefaniotis
Journal:  J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.065

10.  Comparison of imaging properties of a computed radiography system and screen-film systems.

Authors:  S Sanada; K Doi; X W Xu; F F Yin; M L Giger; H MacMahon
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1991 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  5 in total

1.  Influence of cone beam CT enhancement filters on diagnosis ability of longitudinal root fractures.

Authors:  M C C Nascimento; Y Nejaim; S M de Almeida; F N Bóscolo; F Haiter-Neto; L C Sobrinho; E J N L Silva
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Does dose optimisation in digital panoramic radiography affect diagnostic performance?

Authors:  Luciano Augusto Cano Martins; Danieli M Brasil; Laís A Forner; Cassiana Viccari; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Deborah Q Freitas; Matheus L Oliveira
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  The comparison of roof visibility of the mandibular canal between cone-beam computed tomography scans and panoramic radiograph images as dependent on the cortical bone thickness of the mandible.

Authors:  Ali-Reza Ketabi; Angeliki Zelka; Hans-Christoph Lauer; Stefan Hassfeld
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-05-18

4.  COVID-19 and beyond: implications for dental radiography.

Authors:  Rachel Little; Jessica Howell; Paul Nixon
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.727

5.  Image quality assessment of pre-processed and post-processed digital panoramic radiographs in paediatric patients with mixed dentition.

Authors:  Isti Rahayu Suryani; Natalia Salvo Villegas; Sohaib Shujaat; Annelore De Grauwe; Azhari Azhari; Suhardjo Sitam; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2018-12-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.