Radiation dose reduction in direct digital panoramic radiography

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 71, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 42-48

  Gavala, Sophia ^a   Donta, Catherine ^a   Tsiklakis, Kostas ^a   Boziari, Argyro ^b   Kamenopoulou, Vasiliki ^b   Stamatakis, Harry C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

^b GREEK ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION   (Greece)

Author keywords

Absorbed dose; Digital panoramic radiography; Effective dose

Indexed keywords

ABSORBED DOSE; ABSORBED RADIATION; DIGITAL PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; EFFECTIVE DOSE; ENERGY RESPONSE; HELSINKI , FINLAND; IMAGE PROCESSING FUNCTIONS; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTIONS; RANDO PHANTOM; SALIVARY GLANDS; SECONDARY STANDARD; SIGNED RANK; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDY DESIGN; THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS; TLD-100;

DOSIMETERS; DOSIMETRY; IMAGE PROCESSING; RADIOLOGY; TOMOGRAPHY;

RADIOGRAPHY;

ARTICLE; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; IMAGE PROCESSING; PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; THERMOLUMINESCENCE DOSIMETER;

BODY BURDEN; HUMANS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; RADIOGRAPHY, PANORAMIC; RADIOMETRY;

EID: 67649209035     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.03.018     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Visser H., Rödig T., and Hermann K.-P. Dose reduction by digital cephalometric radiography. Angle Orthod 71 3 (2001) 159-163
2. Molander B., Gröndahl H.-G., and Ekestubbe A. Quality of film-based and digital panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33 (2004) 32-36
3. Danforth R.A., and Clark D.E. Effective dose from radiation absorbed during a panoramic examination with a new generation machine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 89 (2000) 236-243
4. Ludlow J.B., Davies-Ludlow L.E., and Brooks S.L. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: Newtom cone beam CT and orthophos plus PS panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 32 (2003) 229-234
5. Williams J.R., and Montgomery A. Measurement of dose in panoramic dental radiology. Br J Radiol 73 873 (2000) 1002-1006
6. Gijbels F., Sanderink G., Wyatt J., Van Dam J., Nowak B., and Jacobs R. Radiation doses of digital cephalometric radiography. Br Dent J 197 (2004) 149-152
7. Shrimpton P.C., Wall B.F., and Fisher E.S. The tissue-equivalence of the Alderson Rando anthropomorphic phantom for X-rays of diagnostic qualities. Phys Med Biol 26 1 (1981) 133-139
8. Bou-Serhal C., Jacobs R., Gijbels F., et al. Absorbed doses from spiral CT and conventional spiral tomography: a phantom vs. cadaver study. Clin Oral Implant Res 12 (2001) 473-478
9. Gori C., Rossi F., Stecco A., Villari N., and Zatelli G. Radiat Protect Dosimetry 90 (2000) 225-227
10. White S.C., Heslop E.W., and Hollender L.G. Panoramic and cephalometric extraoral dental radiograph systems. J Am Dent Assoc 133 12 (2002) 1696-1697
11. Cristy M. Active bone marrow distribution as a function of age in humans. Phys Med Biol 26 3 (1981) 389-400
12. Frederiksen N.L., Benson B.W., and Sokolowski T.W. Effective dose and risk assessment from computed tomography of the maxillofacial complex. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 24 (1995) 55-58
13. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Report of the task group on reference man. ICRP report 23. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1975.
14. International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publications 60. Ann ICRP. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1991. p. 1-86.
15. Tsiklakis K., Donta C., Gavala S., Karayianni K., Kamenopoulou V., and Hourdakis C.J. Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose cone beam CT. Eur J Radiol 56 3 (2005) 413-417
16. Dula K.D., Sanderink G., van der Stelt P.F., Mini R., Nat P., and Buser D. Effects of dose reduction on the detectability of standardized radiolucent lesions in digital panoramic radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 86 (1998) 227-233
17. Gijbels F., Bou Serhal C., Willems G., et al. Diagnostic yield of conventional and digital cephalometric images: a human cadaver study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30 (2001) 101-105
18. Johns H.E., and Cunningham J.R. The physics of radiology. 4th ed. (1983), Springfield, Illinois
19. Lecomber A.R., Downes S.L., Mokhtari M., and Faulkner K. Optimization of patient doses in programmable dental panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 29 (2000) 107-112
20. Visser H., Hermann K.P., Bredemeier S., and Kohler B. Dose measurements comparing conventional and digital panoramic radiography. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 4 4 (2000) 213-216
21. Lecomber A.R., Yoneyama Y., Lovelock D.J., Hosoi T., and Adams A.M. Comparison of patient dose protocols for dental implant planning using conventional radiography and computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30 5 (2001) 255-259
22. Cohnen M., Kemper J., Möbes O., Pawelzik J., and Mödder U. Radiation dose in dental radiology. Eur Radiol 12 (2002) 634-637
23. Freeman J.P., and Brand J.W. Radiation doses of commonly used dental radiographic surveys. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 77 (1994) 285-289
24. Dannewitz B., Hassfeld S., Eickholz P., and Mühling J. Effect of dose reduction in digital dental panoramic radiography on image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 31 (2002) 50-55
25. White S.C., and Rose T.C. Absorbed bone marrow dose in certain dental radiographic techniques. J Am Dent Assoc 98 (1979) 553-558
26. Wall B.F., and Kendall G.M. Collective doses and risks from dental radiology in Great Britain. Br J Radiol 56 (1983) 511-516
27. Maillie H.D., and Gilda J.E. Radiation-induced cancer risk in radiographic cephalometry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 75 (1993) 631-637
28. Auclair P.L., Ellis G.L., Gnepp D.R., Wenig B.M., and Janney C.G. Salivary gland neoplasms: general considerations. In: Ellis G.L., Auclair P.L., and Gnepp D.R. (Eds). Surgical pathology of the salivary glands (1991), W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia 135-164
29. Tsiklakis K., Donta-Bakoyanni C., Tassopoulou M., and Kamenopulou V. Absorbed radiation dose during lateral cephalometric radiography: comparison of screen-film systems and field-size combinations. J Clin Pediatr Dent 24 (2000) 117-121