Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

  • 제38권3호
  • /
  • Pages.146-153
  • /
  • 2013
  • /
  • 2234-7658(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-7666(eISSN)
대한치과보존학회 (The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effects of image acquisition control of digital X-ray system on radiodensity quantification

  • Seong, Wook-Jin (Department of Restorative Science, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry) ;
  • Kim, Hyeon-Cheol (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Pusan National University School of Dentistry and Institute of Translational Dental Sciences) ;
  • Jeong, Soocheol (Department of Restorative Science, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry) ;
  • Heo, Youngcheul (Department of Restorative Science, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry) ;
  • Song, Woo-Bin (Process Development Team, Memory Division R&D Center, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.) ;
  • Ahmad, Mansur (Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry)
  • 투고 : 2013.05.15
  • 심사 : 2013.07.02
  • 발행 : 2013.08.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objectives: Aluminum step wedge (ASW) equivalent radiodensity (eRD) has been used to quantify restorative material's radiodensity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of image acquisition control (IAC) of a digital X-ray system on the radiodensity quantification under different exposure time settings. Materials and Methods: Three 1-mm thick restorative material samples with various opacities were prepared. Samples were radiographed alongside an ASW using one of three digital radiographic modes (linear mapping (L), nonlinear mapping (N), and nonlinear mapping and automatic exposure control activated (E)) under 3 exposure time settings (underexposure, normal-exposure, and overexposure). The ASW eRD of restorative materials, attenuation coefficients and contrasts of ASW, and the correlation coefficient of linear relationship between logarithms of gray-scale value and thicknesses of ASW were compared under 9 conditions. Results: The ASW eRD measurements of restorative materials by three digital radiographic modes were statistically different (p = 0.049) but clinically similar. The relationship between logarithms of background corrected grey scale value and thickness of ASW was highly linear but attenuation coefficients and contrasts varied significantly among 3 radiographic modes. Varying exposure times did not affect ASW eRD significantly. Conclusions: Even though different digital radiographic modes induced large variation on attenuation of coefficient and contrast of ASW, E mode improved diagnostic quality of the image significantly under the underexposure condition by improving contrasts, while maintaining ASW eRDs of restorative materials similar. Under the condition of this study, underexposure time may be acceptable clinically with digital X-ray system using automatic gain control that reduces radiation exposure for patient.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Wenzel A, Grondahl HG. Direct digital radiography in the dental office. Int Dent J 1995;45:27-34.
  2. Nomoto R, Mishima A, Kobayashi K, McCabe JF, Darvell BW, Watts DC, Momoi Y, Hirano S. Quantitative determination of radio-opacity: equivalence of digital and film X-ray systems. Dent Mater 2008;24:141-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.08.005
  3. Schick Technologies. CDR DICOM quick start guide. Long Island City: Schick Technologies, Inc.; 2004.
  4. Uffmann M, Schaefer-Prokop C. Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. Eur J Radiol 2009;72:202-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.060
  5. ISO 4049 Dentistry - polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 1998.
  6. ISO-Standards ISO 9917 Dentistry-water-based cements. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 1998. p1-23.
  7. Nickoloff EL, Dutta AK, Lu ZF. Influence of phantom diameter, kVp and scan mode upon computed tomography dose index. Med Phys 2003;30:395-402. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1543149
  8. Rasimick BJ, Shah RP, Musikant BL, Deutsch AS. Radiopacity of endodontic materials on film and a digital sensor. J Endod 2007;33:1098-1101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.05.005
  9. Sabbagh J, Vreven J, Leloup G. Radiopacity of resin based materials in film radiographs and storage phosphor plate (Diagora). Oper Dent 2004;29:677-684.
  10. Baksi BG, Sen BH, Eyuboglu TF. Differences in aluminum equivalent values of endodontic sealers: conventional versus digital radiography. J Endod 2008;34:1101-1104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.06.004
  11. Gu S, Rasimick BJ, Deutsch AS, Musikant BL. Radiopacity of dental materials using a digital X-ray system. Dent Mater 2006;22:765-770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.11.004
  12. Rasimick BJ, Gu S, Deutsch AS, Musikant BL. Measuring the radiopacity of luting cements, dowels, and core build-up materials with a digital radiography system using a CCD sensor. J Prosthodont 2007;16:357-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00209.x
  13. Yang J, Chiou R, Ruprecht A, Vicario J, MacPhail LA, Rams TE. A new device for measuring density of jaw bones. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002;31:313-316. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600715
  14. Southard TE, Wunderle DM, Southard KA, Jakobsen JR. Geometric and densitometric standardization of intraoral radiography through use of a modified XCP system. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999;87:253-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(99)70281-7
  15. Kitagawa H, Scheetz JP, Farman AG. Comparison of complementary metal oxide semiconductor and charge-coupled device intraoral X-ray detectors using subjective image quality. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32:408-411. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/19990417
  16. Schulze D, Rother UJ, Fuhrmann AW, Tietke M. A comparison of two intraoral CCD sensor systems in terms of image quality and interobserver agreement. Int J Comput Dent 2003;6:141-150.
  17. Benediktsdottir IS, Hintze H, Petersen JK, Wenzel A. Image quality of two solid-state and three photostimulable phosphor plate digital panoramic systems, and treatment planning of mandibular third molar removal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003;32:39-44. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/25838744
  18. Walsh C, Gorman D, Byrne P, Larkin A, Dowling A, Malone JF. Quality assurance of computed and digital radiography systems. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:271-275. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncn047
  19. Chantler CT, Olsen K, Dragoset RA, Chang J, Kishore AR, Kotochigova SA, Zucker DS. X-Ray Form Factor, Attenuation and Scattering Tables (version 2.1). [Online] Available: http://physics.nist.gov/ffast [Monday, 29-Jul-2013 23:22:42 EDT]. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. Originally published as Chantler CT. J Phys Chem Ref Data 2000;29:597-1048. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1321055
  20. Brooks RA, Di Chiro G. Beam hardening in x-ray reconstructive tomography. Phys Med Biol 1976;21:390-398. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/21/3/004
  21. Cho JY, Han WJ. The reduction methods of operator's radiation dose for portable dental X-ray machines. Restor Dent Endod 2012;37:160-164. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2012.37.3.160