Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of portable digital radiography for dental investigations of ancient Egyptian mummies during archaeological excavations: Evaluation and discussion of the advantages and limitations of different approaches and projections

  • Seiler, Roger (Institute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich) ;
  • Eppenberger, Patrick (Institute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich) ;
  • Ruhli, Frank (Institute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich)
  • Received : 2018.04.28
  • Accepted : 2018.07.06
  • Published : 2018.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: In the age of X-ray computed tomography (CT) and digital volume tomography (DVT), with their outstanding post-processing capabilities, indications for planar radiography for the study of the dentition of ancient Egyptian mummies may easily be overlooked. In this article, the advantages and limitations of different approaches and projections are discussed for planar oral and maxillofacial radiography using portable digital X-ray equipment during archaeological excavations. Furthermore, recommendations are provided regarding projections and sample positioning in this context. Materials and Methods: A total of 55 specimens, including 19 skeletonized mandibles, 14 skeletonized skulls, 18 separate mummified heads, and 4 partially preserved mummies were imaged using portable digital X-ray equipment in the course of archaeological excavations led by the University of Basel in the Valley of the Kings between 2009 and 2012. Images were evaluated by 2 authors with regard to the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures using a 4-point grading system(Likert scale). Results: Overall, the visibility of diagnostically relevant dental structures was rated highest by both authors on X-ray images acquired using a dental detector. The tube-shift technique in the lateral projections of mandibular dentition achieved the second-best rating, and lateral projections achieved the third-best rating. Conclusion: Conventional planar digital X-ray imaging, due to its ubiquity, remains an excellent method-and often the only practicable one-for examining the skulls and teeth of ancient Egyptian mummies under field conditions. Radiographic images of excellent diagnostic quality can be obtained, if an appropriate methodology regarding the selected projections and sample placement is followed.

Keywords

References

  1. Gryphius A. And. Gryphii mumiae wratislavienses. Wroclaw: Sumptibus Viti Jacobi Drescheri; 1662.
  2. Smith GE. The royal mummies. London: Bristol Classical Press; 2000.
  3. Harris JE, Wente EF. An X-ray atlas of the royal mummies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1980.
  4. Cosmacini P, Piacentini P. Notes on the history of the radiological study of Egyptian mummies: from X-rays to new imaging techniques. Radiol Med 2008; 113: 615-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-008-0280-7
  5. Boni T, Ruhli FJ, Chhem RK. History of paleoradiology: early published literature, 1896-1921. Can Assoc Radiol J 2004; 55: 203-10.
  6. Lynnerup N. Mummies. Am J Phys Anthropol 2007; Suppl 45: 162-90.
  7. Moodie RL. Roentgenologic studies of Egyptian and Peruvian mummies. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History; 1931.
  8. Gerald C. Considered limitations and possible applications of computed tomography in mummy research. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2015; 298: 1088-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.23151
  9. Scheinfeld MH, Shifteh K, Avery LL, Dym H, Dym RJ. Teeth: what radiologists should know. Radiographics 2012; 32: 1927-44. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.327125717
  10. Youssefzadeh S, Gahleitner A, Bernhart D, Bernhart T. Conventional dental radiography and future prospectives. Radiologe 1999; 39: 1018-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001170050597
  11. Conlogue G, Nelson A. Polaroid imaging at an archaeological site in Peru. Radiol Technol 1999; 70: 244-50.
  12. Olsson L, Nilsson M, Svenson B, Hellen-Halme K. The effect of anatomical noise on perception of low contrast in intra-oral radiographs: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150402. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150402
  13. Ruhli FJ, Chhem RK, Boni T. Diagnostic paleoradiology of mummified tissue: interpretation and pitfalls. Can Assoc Radiol J 2004; 55: 218-27.
  14. Abrahams JJ. Dental CT imaging: a look at the jaw. Radiology 2001; 219: 334-45. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma33334
  15. Cox SL. A critical look at mummy CT scanning. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2015; 298: 1099-110. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.23149
  16. Ruhli F, Ikram S, Bickel S. New ancient Egyptian human mummies from the Valley of the Kings, Luxor: anthropological, radiological, and Egyptological investigations. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 530362.
  17. Teich S, Al-Rawi W, Heima M, Faddoul FF, Goldzweig G, Gutmacher Z, et al. Image quality evaluation of eight complementary metal-oxide semiconductor intraoral digital X-ray sensors. Int Dent J 2016; 66: 264-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/idj.12241
  18. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86: 420-8. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
  19. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016; 15: 155-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
  20. Saab G, Chem RK, Bohay RN. Paleoradiologic techniques. In: Chhem RK, Brothwell DR. Paleoradiology: imaging mummies and Fossils. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2008. p. 15-54.
  21. White SC, Pharoah MJ. The evolution and application of dental maxillofacial imaging modalities. Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52: 689-705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2008.05.006