Assessments of the physical performance of 2 generations of 2 direct digital intraoral sensors

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontics

Volumn 88, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 517-523

  Attaelmanan, Atta G ^a,b   Borg, Eva ^a   Gröndahl, Hans Göran ^a  

^a Department of Oral Diagnostic Radiology ^*  (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EVALUATION; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; STATISTICS; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

ARTIFACTS; CONTRAST MEDIA; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EVALUATION STUDIES; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL;

EID: 0033211020     PISSN: 10792104     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1079-2104(99)70073-9     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Mouyen F, Benz C, Sonnabend E, Lodter JP. Presentation and physical evaluation of RadioVisioGraphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989;68:238-42.
2. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Kelly MS. Flash Dent: an alternative charge-coupled device/scintillator-based direct digital intraoral radiographie system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1994;23:11-7.
3. Nelvig P, Wing K, Welander U. Sens-A-Ray: a new system for direct digital intraoral radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992;74:818-23.
4. Molteni R. Visualix, a new system for direct dental x-ray imaging: a preliminary report. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1992;21:222-3.
5. Hayakawa Y, Farman AG, Scarfe WC, Kuroyanagi K, Molteni R. Beam quality and image contrast with the VIXA-2. Oral Radiol 1995;11:31-6.
6. Farman AG, Scarfe WC, Schick DB, Rumack PM. Computed dental radiogaphy: evaluation of a new charge-coupled device-based intraoral radiographic system. Quintessence International 1995;26:399-404.
7. Possum ER. Active pixel sensors: Are CCD's dinosaurs? Proc SPIE 1993;1900:2-14.
8. Medical imaging - the assessment of image quality. Bethesda, Md: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1996 Apr. ICRU Report No. 54.
9. Chen S-K, Hollender L. Detector response and exposure control of the RadioVisioGraphy system (RVG 32000 ZHR). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76:104-11.
10. Harada T, Nishikawa K, Shibuya H, Hayakawa Y, Kuroyanagi K. Sens-A-Ray characteristics with variations in beam quality. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:120-3.
11. Yoshioka T, Kobayashi C, Suda H, Sasaki T. Correction of background noise in direct digital dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996;25:256-62.
12. Kashima I, Sakurai T, Matsuki T, Nakamura K, Aoki H, Ishii M, et al. Intraoral computed radiography using Fuji computed radiography image plate: correlation between image quality and reading condition. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78:239-46.
13. Welander U, McDavid WD, Sanderink GCH, Tronje G, Mörner AC, Dove B. Resolution as defined by line spread and modulation transfer functions for four digital intraoral radiographic systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78:109-15.
14. Shrout M, Potter BJ, Yurgalavage HM, Hildebolt CF, Vannier W. 35-mm film scanner as an intraoral dental radiograph digitizer: a quantitative evaluation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76:502-9.
15. Droege RT, Morin RL. A practical method to measure the MTF of CT scanners. Med Phys 1982;9:758-60.
16. Droege RT. A practical method to routinely monitor resolution in digital images. Med Phys 1983;10:337-43.
17. Moltini R. Direct digital x-ray imaging with Visualix/Vixa. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76:235-43.
18. Sanderink GCH, Huiskens R, van der Stell PF, Welander US, Stheeman SE. Image quality of direct digital intraoral x-ray sensors in assessing root canal length: the RadioVisioGraphy, Visualix/Vixa, Se-A-Ray and Flash Dent systems compared to Ektaspeed films. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78:125-32.
19. Wenzel A. Digital radiography and caries diagnosis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1998;27:3-11.
20. Borg E, Gröndahl H-G. On the dynamic range of different x-ray photon detectors in intra-oral radiography. A comparison of image quality in film, charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996;25:82-8.
21. Gröndahl H-G, Gröndahl K, Okano T, Webber RL. Statistical contrast enhancement of subtraction images for radiographic caries diagnosis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1982;53:219-23.
22. Wenzel A. Sensor noise in direct digital imaging (the RadioVisioGraphy, Sens-A-Ray, and Visualix/Vixa systems) evaluated by subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;77:70-4.
23. Nishikawa RM, Yaffe MJ. Effects of various noise sources on the detective quantum efficiency of phosphor screens. Med Phys 1990;17:887-93.
24. Hayakwa Y, Farman AG, Scarfe WC, Kuroyanagi K, Rumack PM, Schick DB. Optimum exposure ranges for computed dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996;25:71-5.
25. McDonnell D, Price C. An evaluation of the Sens-A-Ray digital dental imaging system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993;22:121-6.
26. Kullendorff B, Nilsson M, Rohlin M. Diagnostic accuracy of direct digital dental radiography for the detection of periapical bone lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996;82:344-50.
27. Chen SK, Hollender L, Omnell K-Å. Detecting small mass differences with a direct digital dental x-ray system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997;26:63-6.
28. Kashima I. Computed radiography with photostimulable phosphor in oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:277-98.