Imaging Science in Dentistry

  • 제48권4호
  • /
  • Pages.261-268
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2233-7822(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2233-7830(eISSN)
대한영상치의학회 (Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

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

  • Suryani, Isti Rahayu (Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Universitas Gadjah Mada) ;
  • Villegas, Natalia Salvo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Universidad de Los Andes) ;
  • Shujaat, Sohaib (OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven) ;
  • De Grauwe, Annelore (OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven) ;
  • Azhari, Azhari (Department of Dental Radiology, University of Padjajaran) ;
  • Sitam, Suhardjo (Department of Dental Radiology, University of Padjajaran) ;
  • Jacobs, Reinhilde (OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven)
  • 투고 : 2018.07.13
  • 심사 : 2018.09.23
  • 발행 : 2018.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: To determine the impact of an image processing technique on diagnostic accuracy of digital panoramic radiographs for the assessment of anatomical structures in paediatric patients with mixed dentition. Materials and Methods: The study consisted of 50 digital panoramic radiographs of children aged from 6 to 12 years, which were later on processed using a dedicated image processing method. A modified clinical image quality evaluation chart was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anatomical structures in maxillary and mandibular anterior and maxillary premolar region of processed images. Results: A statistically significant difference was observed between pre and post-processed evaluation of anatomical structures(P<0.05) in the maxillary and mandibular anterior region. The anterior region was found to be more accurate in post-processed images. No significant difference was observed in the maxillary premolar region (P>0.05). The Inter-observer and intra-observer reliability of both pre and post processed images were excellent (>0.82) for anterior region and good (>0.63) for premolar region. Conclusion: The application of image processing technique in digital panoramic radiography can be considered a reliable method for improving the quality of anatomical structures in paediatric patients with mixed dentition.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Clark HC, Curzon ME. A prospective comparison between findings from a clinical examination and results of bitewing and panoramic radiographs for dental caries diagnosis in children. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2004; 5: 203-9.
  2. Abdinian M, Razavi SM, Faghihian R, Samety AA, Faghihian E. Accuracy of digital bitewing radiography versus different views of digital panoramic radiography for detection of proximal caries. J Dent (Tehran) 2015; 12: 290-7.
  3. Barot AA, Chaturvedi MK, Butala PB, Rao VV, Patel PS, Barot AA. A study on changes in image quality with dose reduction in digital panoramic radiographs. J Int Oral Health 2017; 9: 174-9.
  4. Sabarudin A, Tiau YJ. Image quality assessment in panoramic dental radiography: a comparative study between conventional and digital systems. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2013; 3: 43-8.
  5. Peker I, Toraman AM, Usalan G, Altunkaynak B. The comparison of subjective image quality in conventional and digital panoramic radiography. Indian J Dent Res 2009; 20: 21-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.49052
  6. Parissis N, Angelopoulos C, Mantegari S, Karamanis S, Masood F, Tsirlis A. A comparison of panoramic image quality between a digital radiography storage phosphor system and a film-based system. J Contemp Dent Pract 2010; 11: E009-16.
  7. Amiri SA, Moudi E. Image quality enhancement in digital panoramic radiograph. J AI Data Min 2014; 2: 1-6.
  8. Kandan RS, John A, Kumar S. An improved contrast enhancement approach for panoramic dental x-ray images. ARPN J Eng App Sci 2015; 10: 1897-901.
  9. Svenson B, Larsson L, Bath M. Optimization of exposure in panoramic radiography while maintaining image quality using adaptive filtering. Acta Odontol Scand 2016; 74: 229-35. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2015.1100752
  10. Baksi BG, Alpoz E, Sogur E, Mert A. Perception of anatomical structures in digitally filtered and conventional panoramic radiographs: a clinical evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39: 424-30. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/30570374
  11. Gijbels F, De Meyer AM, Bou Serhal C, Van den Bossche C, Declerck J, Persoons M, et al. The subjective image quality of direct digital and conventional panoramic radiography. Clin Oral Investig 2000; 4: 162-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840000059
  12. Choi BR, Choi DH, Huh KH, Yi WJ, Heo MS, Choi SC, et al. Clinical image quality evaluation for panoramic radiography in Korean dental clinics. Imaging Sci Dent 2012; 42: 183-90. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2012.42.3.183
  13. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ. Statistics with confidence. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Books; 2003.
  14. Angelopoulos C, Bedard A, Katz JO, Karamanis S, Parissis N. Digital panoramic radiography: an overview. Semin Orthod 2004; 10: 194-203. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2004.05.003
  15. Ahmad SA, Taib MN, Khalid NE, Taib H. Correlation between quantitative and qualitative analysis on image quality of digital dental X-ray images. J Comput Sci Comput Math 2012; 2: 43-51. https://doi.org/10.20967/jcscm.2012.08.008
  16. Yalcinkaya S, Kunzel A, Willers R, Thoms M, Becker J. Subjective image quality of digitally filtered radiographs acquired by the Durr Vistascan system compared with conventional radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: 643-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.08.003
  17. Kaeppler G, Axmann-Krcmar D, Reuter I, Meyle J, Gomez-Roman G. A clinical evaluation of some factors affecting image quality in panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2000; 29: 81-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600505
  18. Lehmann TM, Troeltsch E, Spitzer K. Image processing and enhancement provided by commercial dental software programs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 31: 264-72. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600707
  19. Batista SS, Panzarella FK, Tavano O, Filho AM, Junqueira JL. Image adjustments on digital panoramic radiographs using Adobe Photoshop CS3 software. Rev Sul-Bras Odontol 2013; 10: 394-401.
  20. Gijbels F, Sanderink G, Pauwels H, Jacobs R. Subjective image quality of digital panoramic radiographs displayed on monitor and printed on various hardcopy media. Clin Oral Investig 2004; 8: 25-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-003-0239-y
  21. Bekiroglu N, Mete S, Ozbay G, Yalcinkaya S, Kargul B. Evaluation of panoramic radiographs taken from 1,056 Turkish children. Niger J Clin Pract 2015; 18: 8-12. https://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.170822
  22. Temmerman A, Hertele S, Teughels W, Dekeyser C, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. Are panoramic images reliable in planning sinus augmentation procedures? Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 189-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02000.x
  23. Rushton VE, Horner K, Worthington HV. The quality of panoramic radiographs in a sample of general dental practices. Br Dent J 1999; 186: 630-3. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800182
  24. Kayal RA. Distortion of digital panoramic radiographs used for implant site assessment. J Orthod Sci 2016; 5: 117-20. https://doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.192113
  25. Vazquez L, Nizamaldin Y, Combescure C, Nedir R, Bischof M, Dohan Ehrenfest DM, et al. Accuracy of vertical height measurements on direct digital panoramic radiographs using posterior mandibular implants and metal balls as reference objects. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20110429. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20110429