Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 29, Issue 1 20-27, Copyright © 2000 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Interaction between noise and file compression and its effect on the recognition of caries in digital imaging

A. Janhom, P. F. van der Stelt and F. C. van Ginkel
Department of Oral Radiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the interaction between image noise and file compression, with special emphasis on the accuracy of caries diagnosis. METHODS: Fifty-nine bitewing radiographs of patients were taken simultaneously with Ektaspeed Plus (Eastman-Kodak, Rochester, NY, USA) film without lead foil and the Digora storage phosphor system (Soredex, Helsinki, Finland). Three different levels of Gaussian noise were added to the original digital images which were then compressed with JPEG 53. Seven observers evaluated the presence and depth of caries lesions on selected approximal surfaces on a 5-point scale. The results of JPEG 27 compression from a previous study were also included. ROC analysis was used together with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). RESULTS: JPEG 27 and 53 reduced the file size down to 7% and 4.6% of the original respectively. ROC curve analysis showed no significant difference between image conditions (original, JPEG 27, and JPEG 53) at the same noise level. JPEG 27 and 53 had larger Az scores than their original counterparts at the same noise level. However, MANOVA showed that for depth estimation of enamel lesions JPEG 53 resulted in a higher observer error. CONCLUSIONS: Both JPEG 53 and 27 could reduce some of the adverse effect of noise from the image by removing high spatial frequencies. JPEG 53, resulting in a compression ratio of 1:21, does not compromise the diagnostic performance in general. JPEG 53 compression may however affect the ability to detect enamel lesions.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A Fidler, U Skaleric, and B Likar The effect of image content on detail preservation and file size reduction in lossy compression Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., October 1, 2007; 36(7): 387 - 392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Fidler, B Likar, and U Skaleric Lossy JPEG compression: easy to compress, hard to compare. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., March 1, 2006; 35(2): 67 - 73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Gegler, C. Mahl, and V Fontanella Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., January 1, 2006; 35(1): 10 - 13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L Koenig, E Parks, M Analoui, and G Eckert The impact of image compression on diagnostic quality of digital images for detection of chemically-induced periapical lesions Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., January 1, 2004; 33(1): 37 - 43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T Pabla, J. Ludlow, D. Tyndall, E Platin, and M Abreu Jr Effect of data compression on proximal caries detection: observer performance with DenOptix(R) photostimulable phosphor images Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., January 1, 2003; 32(1): 45 - 49. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]