Conventional and predicted Perceptibility Curves for contrast-enhanced direct digital intraoral radiographs

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 219-225

  Yoshiura, K ^a,b   Welander, U ^b   Shi, X Q ^b   Li, G ^b   Kawazu, T ^a   Tatsumi, M ^a   Okamura, K ^a   McDavid, W D ^c   Kanda, S ^a  

^a KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital radiography, dental; Radiographic image enhancement; Radiography, dental

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FORECASTING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; SURFACE PROPERTY; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; VISION;

ALGORITHMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FORECASTING; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; STATISTICS; SURFACE PROPERTIES; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0035405341     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600607     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Ishida M, Doi K, Loo L-N, Metz CE, Lehr JL. Digital image processing: effect on detectability of simulated low-contrast radiographic patterns. Radiology 1984; 150: 569-575.
2. Golubow NA, Farman AG, von Fraunhofer JA, Kelly MS. Direct digital radiography for the detection of defects in a standard aluminium test object through composite resin restorative materials. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1994; 23: 91-96.
3. Metz CE, Chan H-P, Doi K, Shen J-H. Contrast enhancement of noisy images by windowing: limitations due to the finite dynamic range of the display system. Medical Physics 1989; 16: 170-178.
4. De Belder M, Bollen R, Duville R. A new approach to the evaluation of radiographic systems. J Photog Sci 1971; 19: 126-131.
5. Bollen R. Evaluation of image quality performances of radiographic systems by the Perceptibility Curve (PC) method. In: House AG, (ed). The physics of medical imaging: recording system measurements and techniques. American Institute of Physics: New York, 1979, pp 588-610.
6. McDavid WD, Welander U, Pillai BK, Morris CR. The Intrex - a constant-potential X-ray unit for periapical dental radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1982; 53: 433-436.
7. Miles DA, McDavid WD, Welander U, Hockett S. Comparison of conventional dental radiographs and xeroradiographs using perceptibility curves. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1986; 62: 92-95.
8. Mouyen F, Benz C, Sonnabend E, Lodter P. Presentation and physical evaluation of RadioVisioGraphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989; 68: 238-242.
9. Miles DA, Van Dis ML, Peterson MG. Information yield: a comparison of Kodak T-Mat G, Ortho L and RP X-Omat films. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1989; 18: 15-18.
10. Horner K, Shearer AC, Walker A, Wilson NHF. RadioVisioGraphy: an initial evaluation. Br Dent J 1990; 168: 244-248.
11. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Kelly MS. Flash Dent: an alternative charge-coupled device/scintillator-based direct digital intraoral radiographic system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1994; 23: 11-17.
12. Svenson B, Welander U, Anneroth G, Söderfeldt B. Exposure parameters and their effects on diagnostic accuracy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994; 78: 544-550.
13. Wakoh M, Farman AG, Scarfe WC, Kelly MS, Kuroyanagi K. Perceptibility of defects in an aluminum test object: a comparison of the RVG-S and first generation VIXA systems with and without added niobium filtration. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1995; 24: 211-214.
14. Yoshiura K, Stamatakis H, Shi XQ, et al. The perceptibility curve test applied to direct digital dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1998; 27: 131-135.
15. Stamatakis HC, Yoshiura K, Shi X-Q, Welander U, McDavid WD. A simplified method to obtain Perceptibility Curves for direct dental digital CCD detectors. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 112-115.
16. Yoshiura K, Stamatakis H, Welander U, et al. Prediction of Perceptibility Curves of direct digital intraoral radiographic systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 224-231.
17. Harrison RM. Digital radiography. Phys Med Biol 1988; 33: 751-784.
18. Rose A. The sensitivity performance of the human eye on an absolute scale. J Opt Soc Am 1948; 38: 196-208.
19. Wenzel A, Hintze H, Mikkelsen L, Mouyen F. Radiographic detection of occlusal caries in noncavitated teeth. A comparison of conventional film radiographs, digitized film radiographs, and RadioVisioGraphy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 72: 621-626.
20. Wenzel A, Hintze H. Perception of image quality in direct digital radiography after application of various image treatment filters for detectability of dental disease. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993; 22: 131-134.
21. Møystad A, Svanæs DB, Risnes S, Larheim TA, Gröndahl HG. Detection of approximal caries with a storage phosphor system. A comparison of enhanced digital images with dental X-ray film. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996; 25: 202-206.
22. Shrout MK, Russell CM, Potter BJ, Powell BJ, Hildebolt CF. Digital enhancement of radiographs: can it improve caries diagnosis? J Am Dent Assoc 1996; 127: 469-473.
23. Kullendorff B, Nilsson M. Diagnostic accuracy of direct digital dental radiography for the detection of periapical bone lesions. II. Effects on diagnostic accuracy after application of image processing. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996; 82: 585-589.
24. Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A, Gröndahl HG. Observers' use of image enhancement in assessing caries in radiographs taken by four intra-oral digital systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996; 25: 34-38.
25. Yoshiura K, Kawazu T, Chikui T, et al. Assessment of image quality in dental radiography, part 2: optimum exposure conditions for detection of small mass changes in 6 intraoral radiography systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999; 87: 123-129.
26. Alter AJ, Kargas GA, Kargas SA, Cameron JR, McDermott JC. The influence of ambient and viewbox light upon visual detection of low-contrast targets in a radiograph. Invest Radiol 1982; 17: 402-406.
27. Welander U, McDavid WD, Higgins NM, Morris CR. The effect of viewing conditions on the perceptibility of radiographic details. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1983; 56: 651-654.
28. Cederberg RA, Frederiksen NL, Benson BW, Shulman JD. Effect of different background lighting conditions on diagnostic performance of digital and film images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1998; 27: 293-297.