Comparison between inverted and unprocessed digitized radiographic imaging in periodontal bone loss measurements

被引:12
作者
Scaf, Gulnara [1 ]
Morihisa, Olivia
Monteiro Loffredo, Leonor de Castro [2 ]
机构
[1] UNESP, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Oral Diag & Surg, BR-14801903 Araraquara, SP, Brazil
[2] UNESP, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Publ Hlth, BR-14801903 Araraquara, SP, Brazil
关键词
radiography; dental; digital processing; bone loss/diagnosis;
D O I
10.1590/S1678-77572007000600007
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
The advances in digital imaging technology in dentistry have provided an alternative to film-based radiography and have given new options to detect periodontal bone loss. The purpose of this study was to compare inverted and unprocessed digitized radiographic imaging in periodontal bone loss measurements. Thirty-five film-based periapical radiographs of patients suffering from moderate to advanced untreated periodontal bone loss associated to lower premolar and molars was selected from the department files, with 40 bone loss areas. The film-based radiographs were digitized with a flatbed scanner with a transparency and radiograph adapter used for transilluminating the radiograph imaging. Digitization was performed at 600 dpi and in gray scale. The images were digitized using Image Tool software by applying image inversion, that is, transformation of radiopaque structures into radiolucent structures and vice-versa. The digital data were saved as JPEG files. The images were displayed on a 15-inch and 24-bit video monitor under reduced room lighting. One calibrated examiner performed all radiographic measurements, three times, from the cementoenamel junction to the most apical extension of the bone loss, in both types of image (inverted and unprocessed). Brightness and contrast were adjusted according to the examiner's individual demand. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to compare the measurements from both types of images. The means of radiographic measurements, in mm, for inverted and unprocessed digitized imaging were 6.4485 and 6.3790, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient was significant (0.99) The inverted and unprocessed digitized radiographic images were reliable and there was no difference in the diagnostic accuracy between these images regarding periodontal bone loss measurements.
引用
收藏
页码:492 / 494
页数:3
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   Marginal bone level buccal to mandibular molars in digital radiographs from charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems - An in vitro study [J].
Borg, E ;
Grondahl, K ;
Grondahl, HG .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 1997, 24 (05) :306-312
[2]   Digital radiography of interproximal bone loss; validity of different filters [J].
Eickholz, P ;
Riess, T ;
Lenhard, M ;
Hassfeld, S ;
Staehle, HJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 1999, 26 (05) :294-300
[3]   Validity of radiographic measurement of interproximal bone loss [J].
Eickholz, P ;
Kim, TS ;
Benn, DK ;
Staehle, HJ .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1998, 85 (01) :99-106
[4]   Advances in periodontal diagnosis - 2. New clinical methods of diagnosis [J].
Eley, BM ;
Cox, SW .
BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 1998, 184 (02) :71-74
[5]  
FERMANIAN J, 1984, REV EPIDEMIOL SANTE, V32, P140
[6]   DIRECT DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY FOR THE DETECTION OF PERIODONTAL BONE-LESIONS [J].
FURKART, AJ ;
DOVE, SB ;
MCDAVID, WD ;
NUMMIKOSKI, P ;
MATTESON, S .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1992, 74 (05) :652-660
[7]   PERIODONTAL-DISEASE MORBIDITY QUANTIFICATION .2. VALIDATION OF ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS MEASUREMENTS AND VERTICAL DEFECT DIAGNOSIS FROM DIGITAL BITE-WING IMAGES [J].
HILDEBOLT, CF ;
VANNIER, MW ;
SHROUT, MK ;
PILGRAM, TK ;
PROVINCE, M ;
VAHEY, EP ;
RIETZ, DW .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 1990, 61 (10) :623-632
[8]   Periodontitis detection efficacy of film and digital images [J].
Nair, MK ;
Ludlow, JB ;
Tyndall, DA ;
Platin, E ;
Denton, G .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTICS, 1998, 85 (05) :608-612
[9]  
Sakakura Celso Eduardo, 2004, J Oral Implantol, V30, P2, DOI 10.1563/1548-1336(2004)030<0002:DAOCAI>2.0.CO
[10]  
2