Observer-independent registration of perspective projection prior to subtraction of in vivo radiographs

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 140-150

  Lehmann, T M ^a   Grondahl K ^b   Grondahl H G ^b   Schmitt, W ^c   Spitzer, K ^a  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Image processing, computer assisted; Radiography, dental

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE SUBTRACTION; METHODOLOGY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; LEAST-SQUARES ANALYSIS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE;

EID: 0032060640     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600335     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Lehmann T, Oberschelp W, Pelikan E, Repges R. Bildverarbeitung für die Medizin: Grundlagen, Modelle, Methoden, Anwendungen. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1997.
2. Gröndahl HG, Gröndahl K, Okano T, Webber RL. Statistical contrast enhancement of subtraction images for radiographic caries diagnosis. Oral Surg 1982; 53: 219-223.
3. Gröndahl HG, Gröndahl K. Subtraction radiography for the diagnosis of periodontal bone lesions. Oral Surg 1983; 55: 208-213.
4. Bragger D, Pasquali L, Rylander H, Carnes D, Kornman KS. Computer-assisted densitometric image analysis in periodontal radiography: a methodological study. J Clin Periodontol 1988; 15: 27-37.
5. Wenzel A, Warrer K, Karring T. Digital subtraction radiography in assessing bone changes in periodontal defects following guided tissue regeneration. J Clin Periodontol 1992; 19: 208-213.
6. Janssen PTM, van Palenstein Helderman WH, van Aken J. The effect of in-vivo occurring errors in the reproducibility of radiographs on the use of the subtraction technique. J Clin Periodontol 1989; 16: 53-58.
7. van der Stelt PF, Ruttimann UE, Webber RL. Determination of projections for subtraction radiography based on image similarity measurements. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1989; 18: 113-117.
8. Dunn SM, van der Stelt PF, Fenesy K, Shah S. A comparison of two registration techniques for digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993; 22: 77-80.
9. Lehmann T, Goerke C, Schmitt W, Kaupp A, Repges R. A rotation-extended cepstrum technique optimized by systematic analysis of various sets of X-ray images. Procs SPIE 1996; 2710: 390-401.
10. Ruprecht D, Müller H. Image warping with scattered data interpolation methods. Technical Report 443, FB Informatik LS VII, University of Dortmund, Dortmund, 1992.
11. Bookstein FL. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991.
12. Wenzel A. Effect of manual compared with reference point superimposition on image quality in digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1989; 18: 145-150.
13. Reiss TH. Recognizing planar objects using invariant image features. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 676, Springer: Berlin 1993.
14. Lehmann T, Schmitt W. Determination of bone density in dental implantology by automatic subtraction of digital free-hand radiographs taken intra-orally. In: You DS, Park TW, Lee SR (eds.), Procs. 10th International Congress of Dento-Maxillo-Facial Radiology, Seoul, 1994.
15. Golub GH, van Loan CF. Matrix Computations. Johns Hopkins: Baltimore, 1989.
16. Pratt WK. Digital Image Processing. John Wiley: New York, 1978.
17. Danielson PE, Hammerin M. Note: High accuracy rotation of images. CVGIP: Graphical Models and Image Processing 1992; 54: 340-344.
18. Duda RO, Hart PE. Pattern Classification and Scene Analysis. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1973.
19. Lehmann T, Sovakar A, Schmitt W, Repges R. A Comparison of mathematical similarity measures for digital subtraction radiography. Computers in Biology and Medicine 1997; 27: 151-167.
20. Aagaard E, Donslund C, Wenzel A, Sewerin I. Performance for obtaining maximal gain from a program for digital subtraction radiography. Scand J Dent Res 1991; 99: 166-172.