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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duarte, H.
Right arrow Articles by Sannomiya, E.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duarte, H.
Right arrow Articles by Sannomiya, E.
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2009) 38, 393-400
© 2009 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/40996636

RESEARCH

Effect of image compression of digital lateral cephalograms on the reproducibility of cephalometric points

HEM Duarte1, R Vieck1, DF Siqueira1, F Angelieri1, S Bommarito1, G Dalben2 and EK Sannomiya*

1São Paulo Metodista Dental School, São Paulo, Brazil; 2Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Community Dentistry, Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies, University of São Paulo, Bauru, Brazil; 3Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, São Paulo Metodista Dental School, São Paulo, Brazil

*Correspondence to: Eduardo Kazuo Sannomiya, Faculdade de Odontologia, Universidade Metodista de São Paulo. Av. Lacerda Franco, 1180, CEP 01536-000, São Paulo, Brazil;; E-mail: eduardosannomiya{at}hotmail.com

Received 12 July 2008; revised 10 October 2008; accepted 10 October 2008

Objectives: To evaluate the influence of JPEG quality factors 100, 80 and 60 on the reproducibility of identification of cephalometric points on images of lateral cephalograms, compared with the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) format.

Methods: The sample was composed of 30 images of digital lateral cephalograms obtained from 30 individuals (15 males and 15 females) on a phosphor plate system in DICOM format. The images were converted to JPEG with quality factors 100, 80 and 60 with the aid of software, adding up to 90 images. The 120 images (DICOM, JPEG 100, 80 and 60) were blinded and 12 cephalometric points were identified on each image by three calibrated orthodontists, using the x–y coordinate system, on a cephalometric software.

Results: The results revealed that identification of cephalometric points was highly reproducible, except for the point Orbitale (Or) on the x-axis. The different file formats did not present a statistically significant difference.

Conclusions: JPEG images of lateral cephalograms with quality factors 100, 80 and 60 did not present alterations in the reproducibility of identification of cephalometric points compared with the DICOM format. Good reproducibility was achieved for the 12 points, except for point Or on the x-axis.

Keywords: digital radiography; cephalometrics; measurement; dental; orthodontics






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 2009 by the British Institute of Radiology.