THE EFFECT OF POST-PROCESSING VISUALIZATION ON THE IMAGE QUALITY OF   A PANORAMIC DENTAL DIGITAL SYSTEM

LIQAA JABUR  HASSAN

doi:10.26682/sjuod.2023.26.2.4

LIQAA JABUR HASSAN College of Dentistry, University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region-Iraq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26682/sjuod.2023.26.2.4

Keywords: Panoramic dental radiography; digital panoramic system; image quality

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation is to quantify and evaluate the diagnostic image quality of dental panoramic radiography with and without post-processing visualization. 72 panoramic photos were analyzed and split into two groups: with post processing and without post processing image. Each picture was given a score based on the subject's perception of the anatomical zone and features, as well as the density and contrast of the image. According to these specifications, the digital panoramic system that included post-processing received the maximum score of 3.450.19, whereas the digital panoramic system that did not include post-processing received scores of 3.330.33. In conclusion, the use of digital post-processing visualization has the potential to greatly enhance diagnostic quality in terms of contrast and radiographic density

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baksi BG, Alpöz E, Soǧur E, Mert A (2010) Perception of anatomical structures in digitally filtered and conventional panoramic radiographs: a clinical evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 39:424–430. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/30570374
Pelekos G, Tse JMN, Ho D, Tonetti MS (2019) Defect morphology, bone thickness, exposure settings and examiner experience affect the diagnostic accuracy of standardized digital periapical radiographic images but not of cone beam computed tomography in the detection of peri-implant osseous defects: an in vitro study. J Clin Periodontol 46:1294–1302. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13200
Granlund C, Thilander-Klang A, Ylhan B, Lofthag-Hansen S, Ekestubbe A (2016) Absorbed organ and effective doses from digital intra-oral and panoramic radiography applying the ICRP 103 recommendations for effective dose estimations. Br J Radiol 89:20151052. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20151052
Visser H, Rödig T, Hermann KP. Dose reduction by direct-digital cephalometric radiography. Angle Orthod 2001;71:159-63.
Visser H, Hermann KP, Bredemeier S, et al. Dose measurements comparing conventional and digital panoramic radiography. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 2000;4:213-6.
Garcia Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, et al. Effective dosages for recording Veraviewepocs dental panoramic images: analog film, digital, and panoramic scout for CBCT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:571-7.
Gavala S, Donta C, Tsiklakis K, et al. Radiation dose reduction in direct digital panoramic radiography. Eur J Radiol 2009;71:42-8.
Angelopoulos C, Bedard A, Katz JO, et al. Digital panoramic radiography: An overview. Semin Orthod 2004;10:194-203.
Ramesh A, Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB. Evaluation of a new digital panoramic system: A comparison with film. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001;30:98-100.
Gijbels F, De Meyer AM, Bou Serhal C, et al. The subjective image quality of direct digital and conventional panoramic radiography. Clin Oral Investing 2000;4:162-7.
Benediktsdottir IS, Hintze H, Petersen JK, et al. 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.
Gijbels F, Sanderink G, Pauwels H, et al. Subjective image quality of digital panoramic radiographs displayed on monitor and printed on various harcopy media. Clin Oral Invest 2004;8:25-9.
Fujita M, Kodera Y, Ogawa M, et al. Digital image processing of dentomaxillofacial radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1987;64:485-93.
Lehmann TM, Troeltsch E, Spitzer K. Image processing and enhancement provided by commercial dental software programmes. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002;32:264-72.