Effect of Differences in Pixel Size on Image Characteristics of Digital Intraoral Radiographic Systems: a Physical and Visual Evaluation

Overview

Journal Dentomaxillofac Radiol

Publisher Oxford University Press

Date 2020 Apr 18

PMID 32302229

Citations 3

Authors

Taku Kuramoto

Shinya Takarabe

Kazutoshi Okamura

Kenshi Shiotsuki

Yusuke Shibayama

Hiroki Tsuru

Hiroshi Akamine

Masato Tatsumi

Toyoyuki Kato

Junji Morishita

Kazunori Yoshiura

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To quantify and validate the effect of pixel size on a digital intraoral radiographic system according to International Electrotechnical Commission standards through physical and visual evaluations.

Methods: The digital intraoral radiographic system used was the photostimulable phosphor imaging plate and scanner system. The system had three image capture modes: high-speed (HS), high-resolution (HR), and super high-resolution (SHR) with different pixels. The physical characteristics of the system were evaluated using presampled modulation transfer function (MTF) and the normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS). An aluminum (Al) step phantom with different depths of holes was used to acquire images under various exposure conditions. The average number of perceptible holes from all steps was plotted against each exposure dose. The results were compared to analyze the effects of pixel size on image quality of intraoral radiographs.

Results: The MTF was slightly higher with SHR than with HR and HS. The NNPS with SHR showed about a 40% decrease in magnitude compared to HS. The total number of perceptible holes in the Al step phantom was higher with SHR than with HS and HR in all exposure conditions.

Conclusions: The MTF and NNPS obtained with different pixel size could be quantified by physical evaluation, and the differences were visually validated with Al step phantom. The SHR mode has the potential to decrease the radiation dose without compromising the image quality.

Citing Articles

How Do Different Image Modules Impact the Accuracy of Working Length Measurements in Digital Periapical Radiography? An In Vitro Study.

Abat V, Kaptan R Diagnostics (Basel). 2025; 15(3).

PMID: 39941235 PMC: 11817009. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics15030305.

Evaluation of resolution characteristics of digital intraoral radiographic images using a task transfer function.

Kuramoto T, Takarabe S, Tsuru H, Shibayama Y, Kato T, Yoshiura K Oral Radiol. 2022; 38(4):638-644.

PMID: 35767125 DOI: 10.1007/s11282-022-00633-y.

Effects of differences in pixel size on image characteristics of digital intraoral radiographic systems: a physical and visual evaluation.

Watanabe H, Kurabayashi T Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2021; 51(3):20210093.

PMID: 34914543 PMC: 8925879. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20210093.

Effect of beam quality and readout direction in the edge profile on the modulation transfer function of photostimulable phosphor systems via the edge method.

Takarabe S, Kuramoto T, Shibayama Y, Tsuru H, Tatsumi M, Kato T J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2021; 8(4):043501.

PMID: 34307736 PMC: 8291077. DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.8.4.043501.

References

Tanaka N, Morishita J, Tsuda N, Ohki M . Effect of readout direction in the edge profile on the modulation transfer function of computed radiographic systems by use of the edge method. Radiol Phys Technol. 2013; 6(2):474-9. DOI: 10.1007/s12194-013-0222-5. View

Brennan J . An introduction to digital radiography in dentistry. J Orthod. 2002; 29(1):66-9. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/29.1.66. View

Doi K, Strubler K, Rossmann K . Truncation errors in calculating the MTF of radiographic screen-film systems from the line spread function. Phys Med Biol. 1972; 17(2):241-50. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/17/2/010. View

Vandre R, Pajak J, Abdel-Nabi H, Farman T, Farman A . Comparison of observer performance in determining the position of endodontic files with physical measures in the evaluation of dental X-ray imaging systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000; 29(4):216-22. DOI: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600533. View

Ideguchi T . [The evaluation of physical imaging properties for digital radiography - the resolution property(the slit method)]. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2009; 65(8):1109-17. DOI: 10.6009/jjrt.65.1109. View

Kengyelics S, Launders J, Cowen A . Physical imaging performance of a compact computed radiography acquisition device. Med Phys. 1998; 25(3):354-60. DOI: 10.1118/1.598212. View

Fetterly K, Hangiandreou N, Schueler B, Ritenour E . Measurement of the presampled two-dimensional modulation transfer function of digital imaging systems. Med Phys. 2002; 29(5):913-21. DOI: 10.1118/1.1472498. View

Giger M, Doi K, Fujita H . Investigation of basic imaging properties in digital radiography. 7. Noise Wiener spectra of II-TV digital imaging systems. Med Phys. 1986; 13(2):131-8. DOI: 10.1118/1.595937. View

Sogur E, Baksi B, Mert A . The effect of delayed scanning of storage phosphor plates on occlusal caries detection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012; 41(4):309-15. PMC: 3729000. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/12935491. View

10.

Samei E, Ranger N, Dobbins 3rd J, Chen Y . Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function. Med Phys. 2006; 33(5):1454-65. DOI: 10.1118/1.2188816. View

11.

Samei E, Flynn M, Reimann D . A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device. Med Phys. 1998; 25(1):102-13. DOI: 10.1118/1.598165. View

12.

Araki K, Endo A, Okano T . An objective comparison of four digital intra-oral radiographic systems: sensitometric properties and resolution. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000; 29(2):76-80. DOI: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600504. View

13.

Fetterly K, Schueler B . Performance evaluation of a "dual-side read" dedicated mammography computed radiography system. Med Phys. 2003; 30(7):1843-54. DOI: 10.1118/1.1584045. View

14.

Dobbins 3rd J . Effects of undersampling on the proper interpretation of modulation transfer function, noise power spectra, and noise equivalent quanta of digital imaging systems. Med Phys. 1995; 22(2):171-81. DOI: 10.1118/1.597600. View

15.

Fujita H, Ueda K, Morishita J, Fujikawa T, Ohtsuka A, Sai T . Basic imaging properties of a computed radiographic system with photostimulable phosphors. Med Phys. 1989; 16(1):52-9. DOI: 10.1118/1.596402. View

16.

Samei E, Flynn M . An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems. Med Phys. 2003; 30(4):608-22. DOI: 10.1118/1.1561285. View

17.

Farman T, Vandre R, Pajak J, Miller S, Lempicki A, Farman A . Effects of scintillator on the detective quantum efficiency (DQE) of a digital imaging system. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 101(2):219-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.07.032. View

18.

Yoshiura K, Kawazu T, Chikui T, Tatsumi M, Tokumori K, Tanaka T . Assessment of image quality in dental radiography, part 1: phantom validity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999; 87(1):115-22. DOI: 10.1016/s1079-2104(99)70304-5. View

19.

Takeshita Y, Shimizu M, Jasa G, Weerawanich W, Okamura K, Yoshida S . Prediction of detectability of the mandibular canal by quantitative image quality evaluation using cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018; 47(4):20170369. PMC: 5991759. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20170369. View

20.

Higashide R . [Modulation transfer function--edge method--]. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2009; 65(10):1449-56. DOI: 10.6009/jjrt.65.1449. View