Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006 Jan; 35(1):10-3.DR

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, in simulated external root resorptions (ERR), two factors that may affect results of digital subtraction radiography (DSR): (1) intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility and (2) effects of digital file formats (TIFF, BMP and JPEG) on the estimation of mineral loss.

METHODS

Eleven incisors were radiographed three times (NR, no resorption; SR, small--#1/4 round bur; and LR, large--#2 round bur) on standardized projections. The resulting images were reproduced and saved as TIFF, JPEG and BMP file formats. The pairs of TIFF images (NR x SR and NR x LR) were subtracted three times at 1 week intervals by three observers. One observer subtracted pairs of images (NR x SR and NR x LR) for all file formats. For each subtraction the resorption area was selected and mean pixel density values were calculated.

RESULTS

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) (P = 0.05) showed no statistical differences for intraobserver and interobserver values. Mean pixel density values were: observer A, 121.60 +/- 2.56 (NR x SR) and 111.84 +/- 4.04 (NR x LR); observer B, 121.86 +/- 2.50 (NR x SR) and 110.92 +/- 3.36 (NR x LR); and observer C, 121.70 +/- 2.39 (NR x SR) and 111.10 +/- 2.67 (NR x LR). Also, no statistical differences were found between file formats for LR (TIFF, 110.88 +/- 2.79; JPEG, 111.35 +/- 3.35; BMP, 111.00 +/- 2.70) and for SR between TIFF (121.30 +/- 2.34) and JPEG (120.46 +/- 1.51) or BMP (121.67 +/- 2.18) file formats. Differences were found between the JPEG and BMP groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DSR is reproducible in simulated ERR, and JPEG or BMP file formats do not affect results.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Gegler A
Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Torres, RS, Brazil. adersongegler@hotmail.com
Mahl C
No affiliation info available
Fontanella V
No affiliation info available

MeSH

Analysis of VarianceCadaverData CompressionHumansIncisorModels, DentalObserver VariationRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiography, Dental, DigitalRadiology Information SystemsReproducibility of ResultsRoot ResorptionSubtraction Technique

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16421257

Citation

Gegler, A, et al. "Reproducibility of and File Format Effect On Digital Subtraction Radiography of Simulated External Root Resorptions." Dento Maxillo Facial Radiology, vol. 35, no. 1, 2006, pp. 10-3.
Gegler A, Mahl C, Fontanella V. Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35(1):10-3.
Gegler, A., Mahl, C., & Fontanella, V. (2006). Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions. Dento Maxillo Facial Radiology, 35(1), 10-3.
Gegler A, Mahl C, Fontanella V. Reproducibility of and File Format Effect On Digital Subtraction Radiography of Simulated External Root Resorptions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35(1):10-3. PubMed PMID: 16421257.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions. AU - Gegler,A, AU - Mahl,Cew, AU - Fontanella,V, PY - 2006/1/20/pubmed PY - 2006/4/6/medline PY - 2006/1/20/entrez SP - 10 EP - 3 JF - Dento maxillo facial radiology JO - Dentomaxillofac Radiol VL - 35 IS - 1 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, in simulated external root resorptions (ERR), two factors that may affect results of digital subtraction radiography (DSR): (1) intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility and (2) effects of digital file formats (TIFF, BMP and JPEG) on the estimation of mineral loss. METHODS: Eleven incisors were radiographed three times (NR, no resorption; SR, small--#1/4 round bur; and LR, large--#2 round bur) on standardized projections. The resulting images were reproduced and saved as TIFF, JPEG and BMP file formats. The pairs of TIFF images (NR x SR and NR x LR) were subtracted three times at 1 week intervals by three observers. One observer subtracted pairs of images (NR x SR and NR x LR) for all file formats. For each subtraction the resorption area was selected and mean pixel density values were calculated. RESULTS: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) (P = 0.05) showed no statistical differences for intraobserver and interobserver values. Mean pixel density values were: observer A, 121.60 +/- 2.56 (NR x SR) and 111.84 +/- 4.04 (NR x LR); observer B, 121.86 +/- 2.50 (NR x SR) and 110.92 +/- 3.36 (NR x LR); and observer C, 121.70 +/- 2.39 (NR x SR) and 111.10 +/- 2.67 (NR x LR). Also, no statistical differences were found between file formats for LR (TIFF, 110.88 +/- 2.79; JPEG, 111.35 +/- 3.35; BMP, 111.00 +/- 2.70) and for SR between TIFF (121.30 +/- 2.34) and JPEG (120.46 +/- 1.51) or BMP (121.67 +/- 2.18) file formats. Differences were found between the JPEG and BMP groups. CONCLUSIONS: DSR is reproducible in simulated ERR, and JPEG or BMP file formats do not affect results. SN - 0250-832X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16421257/Reproducibility_of_and_file_format_effect_on_digital_subtraction_radiography_of_simulated_external_root_resorptions_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -