Literature DB >> 21475554

A Comparison of intra-oral digital imaging modalities: Charged Couple Device versus Storage Phosphor Plate.

A Anas, Jm Asaad, Ka Tarboush.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This in vitro study was conducted to compare the accuracy of two digital image receptors in identifying the location of tip of a fine endodontic file and radiographic apex in mandibular posterior teeth.
METHODS: Fourteen human cadaver mandibles with retained molars were selected. These molars were prepared for access to the canals and an endodontic file #10 was introduced into the canal at one of the three random distances from the apex of the tooth. At each distance from the apex and at the apex of the tooth, images were made with two different image receptors; DenOptix storage phosphor plates and Gendex CCD sensor. Six raters viewed all the images for identification of the radiographic apex of the tooth and the tip of the endodontic file. Images were displayed randomly under standardized conditions. To assess intra-rater reliability, all the examiners viewed a subset of randomly selected images again after a time period of one week, inter rater reliability was also assessed. At the end of the study, teeth were extracted and the length of the canals measured to obtain a gold standard.
RESULTS: T-test revealed a significant main effect for the type of image, indicating that raters' error in identifying structures of interest was significantly higher for Denoptix storage phosphor plates.
CONCLUSION: The results of the study clearly reveal that Gnedex CCD produce most reliable images for Root Canal working length estimation when compared with Denoptix SPP.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 21475554      PMCID: PMC3068829     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Health Sci (Qassim)        ISSN: 1658-3639


  20 in total

1.  Intraoral detectors. CCD, CMOS, TFT, and other devices.

Authors:  G C Sanderink; D A Miles
Journal:  Dent Clin North Am       Date:  2000-04

2.  Canal length evaluation of curved canals by direct digital or conventional radiography.

Authors:  Ali Mentes; Nimet Gencoglu
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2002-01

Review 3.  Digital radiography: an overview.

Authors:  Edwin T Parks; Gail F Williamson
Journal:  J Contemp Dent Pract       Date:  2002-11-15

4.  Interpretation of endodontic file lengths using RadioVisiography.

Authors:  B J Leddy; D A Miles; C W Newton; C E Brown
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 4.171

5.  A Method of ascertaining the Relative Position of Unerupted Teeth by means of Film Radiographs.

Authors:  C A Clark
Journal:  Proc R Soc Med       Date:  1910

6.  Endodontic working length assessment. Comparison of storage phosphor digital imaging and radiographic film.

Authors:  R A Cederberg; E Tidwell; N L Frederiksen; B W Benson
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  1998-03

7.  A simple and accurate way to measuring root canal length.

Authors:  N Inoue; D H Skinner
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 4.171

8.  A critical evaluation of some methods of determining tooth length.

Authors:  C M Bramante; A Berbert
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1974-03

9.  Reliability of radiographic interpretations.

Authors:  M Goldman; A H Pearson; N Darzenta
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1974-08

10.  Radiographic determination of canal length direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography.

Authors:  R T Hedrick; S B Dove; D D Peters; W D McDavid
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 4.171

View more
  6 in total

1.  Effect of Different Tube Potential Settings on Caries Detection using PSP Plate and Conventional Film.

Authors:  Daniela Pita De Melo; Adriana Dibo Cruz; Saulo Leonardo Sousa Melo; Julyanna Filgueiras GonçAlves De Farias; Francisco Haiter-Neto; Solange Maria De Almeida
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-04-01

2.  Comparison of two methods of digital imaging technology for small diameter K-file length determination.

Authors:  Ehsani Maryam; Abesi Farida; Akbarzade Farhad; Khafri Soraya
Journal:  Int J Health Sci (Qassim)       Date:  2013-11

3.  Intraoral versus extraoral bitewing radiography in detection of enamel proximal caries: an ex vivo study.

Authors:  Walaa Hussein Abu El-Ela; Mary Medhat Farid; Mostafa Saad El-Din Mostafa
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  The empirical formula for calculating the incident air Kerma in intraoral radiographic imaging.

Authors:  Zoran Mirkov; Katarina M Rajković; Jovan B Stanković; Dario Faj
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Clinical comparison of intraoral CMOS and PSP detectors in terms of time efficiency, patient comfort, and subjective image quality.

Authors:  Kıvanç Kamburoğlu; Erçin Samunahmetoğlu; Nejlan Eratam; Gül Sönmez; Sevilay Karahan
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2022-02-11

6.  Repeat analysis of intraoral digital imaging performed by undergraduate students using a complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensor: An institutional case study.

Authors:  Mohd Yusmiaidil Putera Mohd Yusof; Nur Liyana Abdul Rahman; Amiza Aqiela Ahmad Asri; Noor Ilyani Othman; Ilham Wan Mokhtar
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2017-12-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.