Literature DB >> 8108102

Sensor noise in direct digital imaging (the RadioVisioGraphy, Sens-a-Ray, and Visualix/Vixa systems) evaluated by subtraction radiography.

A Wenzel1.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate sensor noise with the use of the subtraction method in radiographs captured with three direct digital intraoral systems. Ten radiographs were taken of the lower left molar region of a phantom head at each of three exposure times: 0.20 seconds, 0.46 seconds, and 0.60 seconds with the use of the RadioVisioGraphy (Trophy Radiologie, Vincennes, France), Sens-a-Ray (Regam Medical Systems, AB, Sundsvall, Sweden), and Visualix (Gendex, Philips Medical Systems, Inc., Monza, Italy) systems. Neither the x-ray tube nor the phantom were moved between exposures, and the three sensors were identically positioned. The images were stored in the tagged image file format provided by the systems in 8-bit depth and imported by a subtraction program. Subtractions were performed between identical images taken with the three systems. The standard deviation for the distribution of the shades of grey in the subtraction image histogram served as an expression for image noise. Paired t tests evaluated differences between the standard deviations of the subtraction images from the three systems. The standard deviation increased with increasing exposure time for all three systems (p < 0.00001). The standard deviation for the images performed with Visualix were 6.47, 10.34, and 11.16 at exposure times 0.20, 0.46, and 0.60, respectively. For the RadioVisioGraphy, these values were 1.61, 2.03, and 2.18, and for Sens-a-Ray 2.90, 3.98, and 3.96, respectively. The differences between the systems were highly statistically significant (p < 0.0001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8108102     DOI: 10.1016/s0030-4220(06)80110-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol        ISSN: 0030-4220


  3 in total

1.  Variation in voxel value distribution and effect of time between exposures in six CBCT units.

Authors:  R Spin-Neto; E Gotfredsen; A Wenzel
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Accuracy in positioning of dental X-ray images - A comparative study of a portable X-ray device and a wall-mounted device.

Authors:  Julian Lommen; Lara Schorn; Julia Nitschke; Christoph Sproll; Uwe Zeller; Norbert R Kübler; Jörg Handschel; Henrik Holtmann
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2021-09-20

3.  Image quality of a portable X-ray device (Nomad Pro 2) compared to a wall-mounted device in intraoral radiography.

Authors:  Julia Nitschke; Lara Schorn; Henrik Holtmann; Uwe Zeller; Jörg Handschel; David Sonntag; Julian Lommen
Journal:  Oral Radiol       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 1.852

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.