Cargando…

Contrast reference values in panoramic radiographic images using an arch-form phantom stand

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate appropriate contrast reference values (CRVs) by comparing the contrast in phantom and clinical images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phantom contrast was measured using two methods: (1) counting the number of visible pits of different depths in an alumi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Jae-Myung, Lee, Chena, Kim, Jo-Eun, Huh, Kyung-Hoe, Yi, Won-Jin, Heo, Min-Suk, Choi, Soon-Chul, Lee, Sam-Sun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5035725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27672616
http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2016.46.3.203
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate appropriate contrast reference values (CRVs) by comparing the contrast in phantom and clinical images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phantom contrast was measured using two methods: (1) counting the number of visible pits of different depths in an aluminum plate, and (2) obtaining the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for 5 tissue-equivalent materials (porcelain, aluminum, polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE], polyoxymethylene [POM], and polymethylmethacrylate [PMMA]). Four panoramic radiographs of the contrast phantom, embedded in the 4 different regions of the arch-form stand, and 1 real skull phantom image were obtained, post-processed, and compared. The clinical image quality evaluation chart was used to obtain the cut-off values of the phantom CRV corresponding to the criterion of being adequate for diagnosis. RESULTS: The CRVs were obtained using 4 aluminum pits in the incisor and premolar region, 5 aluminum pits in the molar region, and 2 aluminum pits in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) region. The CRVs obtained based on the CNR measured in the anterior region were: porcelain, 13.95; aluminum, 9.68; PTFE, 6.71; and POM, 1.79. The corresponding values in the premolar region were: porcelain, 14.22; aluminum, 8.82; PTFE, 5.95; and POM, 2.30. In the molar region, the following values were obtained: porcelain, 7.40; aluminum, 3.68; PTFE, 1.27; and POM, - 0.18. The CRVs for the TMJ region were: porcelain, 3.60; aluminum, 2.04; PTFE, 0.48; and POM, - 0.43. CONCLUSION: CRVs were determined for each part of the jaw using the CNR value and the number of pits observed in phantom images.