Subjective image quality of solid-state and photostimulable phosphor systems for digital intra-oral radiography.

OBJECTIVES To compare subjectively the image quality of intra-oral radiographs from six digital systems. METHODS Two generations of two different solid-state detectors; Visualix-1 and -2 (Gendex Dental Systems, Milan, Italy), Computed Dental Radiography (CDR) and CDR Active Pixel Sensor (APS) (Schick Technologies Inc., Long Island City, NY, USA), and two photostimulable phosphor (PSP) systems; Digora (Soredex, Orion Corporation, Helsinki, Finland) and DenOptix (Gendex Dental Systems, Milan, Italy) were compared. Tooth-containing specimens from different areas of dried mandibles were radiographed at exposures between 91-9400 microGy. Images were transferred to a personal computer, displayed in random order and evaluated in their original form and after applying a histogram equalisation algorithm. Eight observers graded subjective image quality using a 5-point scale. RESULTS Both CDR systems scored highest for image quality but within the narrowest exposure range. The Visualix images received the lowest scores. The PSP systems produced acceptable image quality at both lower and higher exposures than the solid-state systems. Enhanced images were generally considered to be inferior to the original images, except for those produced by the four solid-state systems at very low exposures. CONCLUSIONS (i) the PSP systems provided a clinically acceptable image quality over a wide exposure range; (ii) the CDR systems had the best image quality but over the narrowest exposure ranges; (iii) the Visualix systems had the lowest image quality; and (iv) histogram equalisation did not generally improve image quality.

[1]  H. Gröndahl,et al.  On the dynamic range of different X-ray photon detectors in intra-oral radiography. A comparison of image quality in film, charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems. , 1996, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[2]  H G Gröndahl,et al.  Assessments of the physical performance of 2 generations of 2 direct digital intraoral sensors. , 1999, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[3]  Dennis G. Fryback,et al.  The Efficacy of Diagnostic Imaging , 1991, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[4]  U. Welander,et al.  Sens-A-Ray. A new system for direct digital intraoral radiography. , 1992, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[5]  A G Farman,et al.  Computed dental radiography: evaluation of a new charge-coupled device-based intraoral radiographic system. , 1995, Quintessence international.

[6]  K. F. Lim,et al.  Intra-oral computed radiography--an in vitro evaluation. , 1996, Journal of dentistry.

[7]  A G Farman,et al.  Flash Dent: an alternative charge-coupled device/scintillator-based direct digital intraoral radiographic system. , 1994, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[8]  K Horner,et al.  Radiovisiography: an initial evaluation , 1990, British Dental Journal.

[9]  Arthur G. Haus,et al.  The Physics of Medical Imaging: Recording System Measurements and Techniques , 1979 .

[10]  H G Gröndahl,et al.  An image plate system for digital intra-oral radiography. , 1996, Dental update.

[11]  I. Kashima.  Computed radiography with photostimulable phosphor in oral and maxillofacial radiology. , 1995, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[12]  Fryback Dg.  A conceptual model for output measures in cost-effectiveness evaluation of diagnostic imaging. , 1983 .

[13]  M. Sonoda,et al.  Computed radiography utilizing scanning laser stimulated luminescence. , 1983, Radiology.

[14]  M. Vannier,et al.  A comparison of the response of storage phosphor and film radiography to small variations in X-ray exposure. , 1997, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[15]  K. Tokumori,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. , 1999, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[16]  A Wenzel,et al.  Digital radiography and caries diagnosis. , 1998, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[17]  Eric R. Fossum,et al.  Active pixel sensors: are CCDs dinosaurs? , 1993, Electronic Imaging.

[18]  Lars Gunnar Månsson.  Evaluation of radiographic procedures : investigations related to chest imaging , 1994 .

[19]  K Horner,et al.  The imaging performance of a storage phosphor system for dental radiography. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[20]  M. Jourlin,et al.  Criteria for the assessment of intrinsic performances of digital radiographic intraoral sensors. , 1996, Academic Radiology.

[21]  R. Molteni,et al.  Direct digital dental x-ray imaging with visualix/VIXA. , 1993, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[22]  W Huda,et al.  Comparison of a photostimulable phosphor system with film for dental radiology. , 1997, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[23]  H L Kundel,et al.  Images, image quality and observer performance: new horizons in radiology lecture. , 1979, Radiology.

[24]  W. McDavid,et al.  Resolution as defined by line spread and modulation transfer functions for four digital intraoral radiographic systems. , 1994, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.