Evaluation of the Effect of Spatial Resolution on Image Quality in Phosphor Plate Systems

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the effect of 4 different scanning protocols offered by the VistaScan Mini Easy scanner on image quality at different exposure times. Materials & Methods: Four number size-2 photostimulable phosphor plates were exposed with 5 different exposure times while keeping other parameters constant. The exposed plates were scanned without delay using 4 different scanning protocols. 10 lp/mm, 20 lp/mm, 25 lp/mm, and 40 lp/mm are offered by the VistaScan Mini Easy scanner. The mean gray value was calculated using the ImageJ program by identifying three non-overlapping regions of interest from the background and each step in the obtained images. The mean of all mean gray values determined for the background and steps on a plate was also considered the mean gray value of that plate. Results: When plate mean gray values at 0.20 s and 0.40 s were examined, a statistically significant difference was observed between the scanning protocols (p<0.001, p=0.001 respectively). It was determined that the plate mean gray value at 40 lp/mm in 0.20 s was lower than that of other scanning protocols. The plate mean gray value at 20 lp/mm in 0.20 s was higher than that at 25 lp/mm. It was determined that the plate mean gray value at 10 lp/mm in 0.40 s was lower than that of the other groups. Conclusion: The effect of spatial resolution on diagnostics in digital imaging per se is a subject under investigation and still not agreed upon. Therefore, more studies on spatial resolution are needed.

Keywords

• Digital Imaging
• Photostimulable Phosphor Plate
• Spatial Resolution

References

1. 1. Farman AG, Farman TT. A comparison of 18 different x-ray detectors currently used in dentistry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Apr;99(4):485-9.
2. 2. Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Bosmans H. Modern dental imaging: a review of the current technology and clinical applications in dental practice. Eur Radiol. 2010 Nov;20(11):2637-55.
3. 3. Akarslan Z. Dijital intraoral radyografinin diş hekimliği uygulamalarındaki yeri dental patolojilerde teşhis etkinliği avantaj ve dezavantajları tercih edilme durumu. Türkiye Klinikleri J Oral Maxillofac Radiol-Special Topics. 2016;2(2):29-34
4. 4. Korner M, Weber CH, Wirth S, Pfeifer KJ, Reiser MF, Treitl MJR. Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview. Radiographics. 2007 May-Jun;27(3):675-86.
5. 5. Abubekir H. Ağız Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi, 2. Baskı. İstanbul: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri; 2014.
6. 6. Kurt H, Nalçacı R. İntraoral dijital görüntüleme sistemleri: Direkt sistemler, CCD, CMOS, düz panel dedektörler, indirekt sistemler, yarı direkt dijital görüntüleme, fosfor plak taramaları. Türkiye Klinikleri J Oral Maxillofac Radiol-Special Topics. 2016;2(2):p 4-9.
7. 7. Parks ET. Digital radiographic imaging: is the dental practice ready? J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Apr;139(4):477-81.
8. 8. Borg E, Gröndahl HG. On the dynamic range of different X-ray photon detectors in intra-oral radiography. A comparison of image quality in film, charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1996 Apr;25(2):82-8.

9. 9. Haiter-Neto F, Pontual ADA, Frydenberg M, Wenzel A. Detection of non-cavitated approximal caries lesions in digital images from seven solid-state receptors with particular focus on task-specific enhancement filters. An ex vivo study in human teeth. Clin Oral Investig. 2008 Sep;12(3):217-23.
10. 10. Wenzel A, Møystad A. Work flow with digital intraoral radiography: a systematic review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2010 Mar;68(2):106-14.
11. 11. 11. Parks ET, Williamson GF. Digital radiography: an overview. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2002 Nov 15;3(4):23-39.
12. 12. Soğur E, Güniz Baksi B. İntraoral dijital görüntüleme sistemleri. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi. 2011 Mar 01;2011(3):249-54.
13. 13. Ferreira LM, Queiroz PM, Santaella GM, Wenzel A, Groppo FC, Haiter-Neto F. The influence of different scan resolutions on the detection of proximal caries lesions. Imaging Sci Dent. 2019 Jun;49(2):97-102
14. 14. Vandenberghe B, Bud M, Sutanto A, Jacobs R. The use of high-resolution digital imaging technology for small diameter K-file length determination in endodontics. Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Apr;14(2):223-31.
15. 15. Stuart C. White M J P. Oral Radiology: Principle and İnterpretation. 7th ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. Elsevier; 2014.
16. 16. Wenzel A, Haiter-Neto F, Gotfredsen E. Influence of spatial resolution and bit depth on detection of small caries lesions with digital receptors. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Mar;103(3):418-22.
17. 17. Lacerda MF, Junqueira RB, Lima TM, Lima CO, Girelli CF, Verner FS. Radiographic diagnosis of simulated external root resorption in multi-rooted teeth: the influence of spatial resolution. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2020 Apr 1;33(1):14-21.
18. 18. de Moura G, Vizzotto MB, Tiecher PFDS, Arús NA, Silveira HLDD. Benefits of using a photostimulable phosphor plate protective device. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2021 Sept 1;50(6):20200339.
19. 19. Wenzel A, Kirkevang LL. High resolution charge‐coupled device sensor vs. medium resolution photostimulable phosphor plate digital receptors for detection of root fractures in vitro. Dent Traumatol. 2005 Feb;21(1):32-6.
20. 20. Li G, Berkhout WE, Sanderink GC, Martins M, van der Stelt PF. Detection of in vitro proximal caries in storage phosphor plate radiographs scanned with different resolutions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008 Sep;37(6):325-9.
21. 21. Berkhout WE, Verheij JG, Syriopoulos K, Li G, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF. Detection of proximal caries with high-resolution and standard resolution digital radiographic systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007 May;36(4):204-10.
22. 22. Nikneshan S, Abbas FM, Sabbagh S. Detection of proximal caries using digital radiographic systems with different resolutions. Indian J Dent Res. 2015 Jan-Feb;26(1):5-10
23. 23. de Oliveira ML, de Souza Pinto GC, Ambrosano GMB, Tosoni GM. Effect of combined digital imaging parameters on endodontic file measurements. J Endod. 2012 Oct;38(10):1404-7.