Effect of dose reduction in digital dental panoramic radiography on image quality

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 50-55

  Dannewitz, B ^a   Hassfeld, S ^a,b   Eickholz, P ^a   Muhling J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Diagnostic imaging; Perception; Radiation dosage; Radiography, panoramic

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAMERA; DENTAL CARE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHY; RADIATION DOSE; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINT; TOOTH;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA DISPLAY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; RADIOGRAPHY, PANORAMIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINT; TOOTH;

EID: 0036371988     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600651     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. van Aken J, van der Linden L. The integral absorbed dose in conventional and panoramic complete-mouth examinations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1966; 66: 603-616.
2. Freeman JP, Brand JW. Radiation doses of commonly used dental radiographic surveys. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994; 77: 285-289.
3. Farman AG, Farman TT. Extraoral and panoramic systems. Dent Clin North Am 2000; 44: 257-272.
4. 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: 818-823.
5. Haßfeld S, Ziegler C, Mühling J. Kann die digitale Panoramaschichtröntgentechnik das filmbasierte Verfahren ersetzten? Zahnärztl Welt 1997; 106: 510-514.
6. Dula K, Sanderink G, van der Stelt PF, Mini R, Buser D. Effects of dose reduction on the detectability of standardized radiolucent lesions in digital panoramic radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998; 86: 227-233.
7. Farman TT, Farman AG, Kelly MS, Firriolo FJ, Yancey JM, Stewart AV. Charge-coupled device panoramic radiography: effect of beam energy on radiation exposure. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1998; 27: 36-40.
8. Hildeboldt CF, Fletcher G, Yokoyama-Crothers N. A comparison of the response of storage phosphor and film radiography to small variations in X-ray exposure. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997; 26: 147-151.
9. Pasler FA, Visser H. Zahnmedizinische Radiologie - Bildege-bende Verfahren. 2nd ed. Thieme: Stuttgart, 2000.
10. Sanderink GCH. Imaging: new versus traditional technological aids. Int Dent J 1993; 43: 335-342.
11. Sidexis. In: Siemens AG (ed). Sidexis. Digitales Röntgen. Handbuch für Anwender. Bensheim, Germany: Siemens Geschäftsbereich Dental, 1995.
12. Sonnabend E. Das Röntgenbild in der zahnärztlichen Praxis. 3rd edn. Hüthig Verlag: Heidelberg, 1998.
13. Harrison RM. Digital radiography. Phys Med Biol 1988; 33: 751-784.
14. 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.
15. Vucich J. The role of anatomic criteria in the evaluation of radiographic images. In: Haus A. (ed.) The physics of medical imaging: recording system measurement and techniques. New York: American Institute of Physics, 1979, pp 573-587.
16. Chesters MS. Human visual perception and ROC methodology in medical imaging. Phys Med Biol 1992; 37: 1433-1476.