DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, G
Right arrow Articles by Welander, U
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, G
Right arrow Articles by Welander, U
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2007) 36, 7-11
© 2007 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/28315324

RESEARCH

Marginal bone levels measured in film and digital radiographs corrected for attenuation and visual response: an in vivo study

G Li*,1,2, PE Engström3, K Nasström1, ZY Lü4, G Sanderink2 and U Welander1

1 Department of Oral Radiology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; 2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 3 Department of Periodontology and Department of Laboraty Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; 4 Department of Stomatology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China

*Correspondence to: Gang Li, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, ACTA, Louwesweg 1, 1066EA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Email: g.li{at}acta.nl

Received 22 August 2005; revised 20 January 2006; accepted 8 February 2006

Objective: To compare the accuracy and precision of measurements on marginal bone levels in differently processed digital radiographs and in film-based radiographs.

Methods: Twenty-one patients with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis were included in this study. Periapical radiographs were exposed with the Dixi digital intraoral radiographic system (Planmeca Oy, Helsinki, Finland) and the F-speed Film (Insight, Eastman-Kodak Co., Rochester, NY), respectively. Digital radiographs were subsequently processed into two sets: (a) correction for attenuation and visual response and (b) the same correction but with an additional shift in grey levels. Patients had periodontal surgery immediately after the radiographs were exposed. The vertical distance from cementoenamel junction to the most apical part of the marginal bone was assessed. The measurements were then employed as reference standard and subtracted by the vertical distance from radiographs accordingly. Altogether, 47 sites were evaluated. Seven observers were employed for evaluation under the same viewing conditions. ANOVA was employed for statistical analysis.

Results: No significant differences were found between the absolute differences of the vertical distance obtained from radiographs to their corresponding reference standards when comparing differently processed digital radiographs, but the absolute differences were significantly smaller in digital radiographs than in films. Interobserver variances were not significant.

Conclusion: Digital radiographs have a favourable measurement accuracy compared with film radiographs when assessing marginal bone levels.

Keywords: radiology, dental; radiography, dental, digital; periodontitis; periodontal bone loss; image processing, computer-assisted






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 2007 by the British Institute of Radiology.