Contrast reference values in panoramic radiographic images using an arch-form phantom stand
신재명, Lee Chena, 김조은, 허경회, 이원진, 허민석, 최순철, 이삼선,
소속 상세정보
신재명 ( Shin Jae-Myung ) - Inje University College of Medicine Ilsan Paik Hospital Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
( Lee Chena ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
김조은 ( Kim Jo-Eun ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
허경회 ( Huh Kyung-Hoe ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
이원진 ( Yi Won-Jin ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
허민석 ( Heo Min-Suk ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
최순철 ( Choi Soon-Chul ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
이삼선 ( Lee Sam-Sun ) - Seoul National University School of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate appropriate contrast reference values (CRVs) by comparing the contrast in phantom and clinical images.
Materials and Methods: Phantom contrast was measured using two methods: (1) counting the number of visible pits of different depths in an aluminum plate, and (2) obtaining the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for 5 tissue-equivalent materials (porcelain, aluminum, polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE], polyoxymethylene [POM], and polymethylmethacrylate [PMMA]). Four panoramic radiographs of the contrast phantom, embedded in the 4 different regions of the arch-form stand, and 1 real skull phantom image were obtained, post-processed, and compared. The clinical image quality evaluation chart was used to obtain the cut-off values of the phantom CRV corresponding to the criterion of being adequate for diagnosis.
Results: The CRVs were obtained using 4 aluminum pits in the incisor and premolar region, 5 aluminum pits in the molar region, and 2 aluminum pits in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) region. The CRVs obtained based on the CNR measured in the anterior region were: porcelain, 13.95; aluminum, 9.68; PTFE, 6.71; and POM, 1.79. The corresponding values in the premolar region were: porcelain, 14.22; aluminum, 8.82; PTFE, 5.95; and POM, 2.30. In the molar region, the following values were obtained: porcelain, 7.40; aluminum, 3.68; PTFE, 1.27; and POM, - 0.18. The CRVs for the TMJ region were: porcelain, 3.60; aluminum, 2.04; PTFE, 0.48; and POM, - 0.43.
Conclusion: CRVs were determined for each part of the jaw using the CNR value and the number of pits observed in phantom images.
키워드
Radiography; Panoramic; Quality Assurance; Health Care; Phantoms; Imaging
원문 및 링크아웃 정보
등재저널 정보