Effect of bone chip orientation on quantitative estimates of changes in bone mass using digital subtraction radiography

Journal of Periodontal Research

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 296-302

  Mol, André ^a   Dunn, Stanley M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (United States)

Author keywords

Bone loss; Model validation; Projective standardization; Subtraction radiography

Indexed keywords

ALVEOLAR BONE; ARTICLE; ATOMIC ABSORPTION; BONE MASS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DENTATE GYRUS; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MANDIBLE; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; ROTATION; STANDARDIZATION; TONGUE; ATOMIC ABSORPTION SPECTROMETRY; BONE; BONE DEMINERALIZATION; BONE DENSITY; CHEMISTRY; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE SUBTRACTION; JAW; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; OSTEOLYSIS; RADIOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL MODEL; VALIDATION STUDY;

CALCIUM;

ALVEOLAR PROCESS; BONE AND BONES; BONE DEMINERALIZATION, PATHOLOGIC; BONE DENSITY; BONE RESORPTION; CALCIUM; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LOGISTIC MODELS; MANDIBLE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; SPECTROPHOTOMETRY, ATOMIC; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE;

EID: 0041758587     PISSN: 00223484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0765.2003.00015.x     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Mol A. Image Processing tools for dental applications. Dent Clin North Am 2000;44:299-318.
2. Vandre RH, Webber RL. Future trends in dental radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:471-478.
3. Reddy MS, Jeffcoat MK. Methods of assessing periodontal regeneration. Periodontol 2000 1999;19:87-103.
4. Mol A. Digital quantitative radiography: tools and toys. Editorial. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999;28:328-329.
5. Byrd V, Mayfield-Donahoo T, Reddy MS, Jeffcoat MK. Semiautomated image registration for digital subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;85:473-478.
6. Rawlinson A, Ellwood RP, Davies RM. An in-vitro evaluation of a dental subtraction radiography system using bone chips on dried human mandibles. J Clin Periodontol 1999;26:138-142.
7. Wenzel A. Effect of manual compared with reference point superimposition on image quality in digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1989;18:145-150.
8. Jeffcoat M, Reddy M, Magnusson I et al. Efficacy of quantitative digital subtraction radiography using radiographs exposed in a multicenter trial. J Periodont Res 1996;31:157-160.
9. Jeffcoat M, Reddy M. Digital subtraction radiography for longitudinal assessment of peri-implant bone change: method and validation. Adv Dent Res 1993;7:196-201.
10. Jeffcoat M, Reddy M, van den Berg H, Bertens E. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography for the assessment of peri-implant bone change. Clin Oral Impl Res 1992;3:22-27.
11. Kuhl E, Nummikoski P. Radiographic absorptiometry method in measurement of localized alveolar bone density changes. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89:375-381.
12. Loftin R, Webber R, Horton R, Tyndall D, Moriarty J. Effect of projective aspects variations on estimates of changes in bone mass using digital subtraction radiography. J Periodont Res 1998;33:352-358.
13. Mol A, Dunn SM. The performance of projective standardization for digital subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003: in press.