Comparison of the Effect of the Time Under the Three Primary Color Lighting of Led Production Before Scanning of Phosphorus Plates

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to compare the effect of light exposure in red, green and blue (RGB) colors prior to scanning of the PSP plates. Materials & Methods An Arduino-based system is produced for standardized light exposure to the irradiated PSP plates. The system consisted of an Arduino Mega 2560 developer board, 2 RGB LED light sources, a TSL2591 digital light sensor and a DHT11 temperature and humidity sensor. A light-tight platform is produced with additive manufacturing and electronical units are integrated into this platform. A two-step alloy was used to create contrast. PSP system (VistaScan, Dürr Dental, Germany) is irradiated with fixed parameters of 70 kV, 8 mA and 0.5 seconds. Scanning of the PSPs were delayed for 1-,3-,5-, and 10-minutes, and half of the active surfaces are exposed to RGB lights independently in full brightness (PWM) and calibrated with lux while the rest is protected. MGVs are measured in 6 regions per image. The MGV differences in regions between conditions were examined by Kruskal-Wallis test. A p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results In PWM setup, signal loss was higher in blue color at 1-,3-, and 5-minutes, but at 10-minutes, only the green light produced half-image. In LUX setup, signal loss was lower in green light. Contrast loss was lower in green light with LUX calibration. (p<0.05) Conclusion Among three colors compared, effect of exposure to green light prior to scanning of the irradiated PSP plates is found to be lower than the other colors.

Keywords

• digital radiology
• material science
• photostimulable phosphor plate

References

1. White SC, Michael PJ, editors. Oral Radiology. 8th ed. United States, Mosby; 2018.
2. Brennan J. An introduction to digital radiography in dentistry. J Orthod. 2002;29:66–69.
3. Noorsaeed AS, Almohammedsaleh AH, Alhayek MM, Alnajar AA, Kariri ON, Albakri AIM, et al. Overview on Updates on Digital Dental Radiography. J Pharm Res Int. 2021;33(59B):23-28
4. Hassan AS, Bhateja S, Arora G, Prathyusha F. Digital Radiography. IJMI. 2020;6(2):33-36.
5. Kaur J, Parganiha Y, Dubey V, Singh D. A review report on medical imaging phosphors. Res Chem Intermed. 2014;40(8):2837-2858.
6. Parks ET, Williamson GF. Digital radiography: an overview. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2002;3(4):23-39.
7. Marinho-Vieira LE, Martins LAC, Freitas DQ, Haiter-Neto F, Oliveira ML. Revisiting dynamic range and image enhancement ability of contemporary digital radiographic systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;51(4):20210404.
8. Kondaveeti KH, Kumaravelu NK, Vanambathina SD, Mathe SE, Vappangi S. A systematic literature review on prototyping with Arduino: Applications, challenges, advantages, and limitations. Comput Sci Rev. 2021;40:100364.

9. Anand N, Puri V. A review of Arduino board's, Lilypad's & Arduino shields. IEEE, 2016.
10. Mohammed EA. A review of embedded systems education in the Arduino age: Lessons learned and future directions. iJEP. 2017;7(2):79-93.
11. Zaharia C, Gabor AG, Gavrilovici A, Stan AT, Idorasi L, Sinescu C, et al. Digital dentistry-3D printing applications. J Interdiscip Med. 2017;2(1):50-53.
12. Liwei L, Fang Y, Liao Y, Chen G, Gao C, Zhu P. 3D printing and digital processing techniques in dentistry: a review of literature. Adv Eng Mater. 2019;21(6):1801013.
13. Prasad S, Kader NA, Sujatha G, Raj T, Patil S. 3D printing in dentistry. Journal of 3D printing in medicine. 2018;2(3):89-91.
14. Vinodh S, Sundararaj G, Devadasan SR, Kuttalingam D, Rajanayagam D. Agility through rapid prototyping technology in a manufacturing environment using a 3D printer. J Manuf Technol Manag. 2009;20(7):1023-1041.
15. Macdonald E, Salas R, Espalin D, Perez M, Aguilera E, Muse D, et al. 3D printing for the rapid prototyping of structural electronics. IEEE Access. 2014;2:234-242.
16. Tashiro M, Nakatani A, Suglura K, Nakayama E. Analysis of image defects in digital intraoral radiography based on photostimulable phosphor plates. Oral Radiol. 2022: Online ahead of print. 10.1007/s11282-022-00645-8
17. Akdeniz BG, Gröndahl HG, and Kose T. Effect of delayed scanning of storage phosphor plates. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005;99(5): 603-607.
18. Amir E, Yousefi A, Soheili S, Ghazikhanloo K, Amini P, Mohammadpoor H. Evaluation of the Effect of Light and Scanning Time Delay on The Image Quality of Intra Oral Photostimulable Phosphor Plates. Open Dent J. 2017;11:690.
19. Campbell G, Skillings JH. Nonparametric stepwise multiple comparison procedures. JASA. 1985;80:998–1003.
20. Berkhout WER, Beuger DA, Sanderink GCH, Stelt PF. The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure?. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33(1):1-5.
21. Galvão NS, Nascimento EHL, Lima CAS, Freitas DQ, Haiter-Neto FH, Oliveira ML. Can a high-density dental material affect the automatic exposure compensation of digital radiographic images?. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2019;48(3):20180331.
22. Maciel ERC, Nascimento EHL, Gaêta-Araujo H, Pontual MLA, Pontual AA, Ramor-Perez FMM. Automatic exposure compensation in intraoral digital radiography: effect on the gray values of dental tissues. BMC Med Imaging. 2002;22(1):1-7.
23. Dashpuntsag O, Yoshida M, Kasai R, Maeda N, Hosoki H, Honda E. Numerical evaluation of image contrast for thicker and thinner objects among current intraoral digital imaging systems. BioMed Res Int. 2017:5215413
24. Bushong SC, editor. Radiologic Science for Technologists: Physics, Biology, And Protection. 10th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2013.