Evaluation of Two Programs Developed for Dental Digital Subtraction Radiography: a Comparison between Different Methods of Geometric Alignment
Kozakiewicz Marcin 1, Bogusiak Katarzyna 1, Denkowski Marcin 3, Hanclik Marcin 2
1Clinical Department of Maxillofacial Surgery
Medical University of Łódź, Military Teaching Hospital, Veterans Central Hospital
ul. Żeromskiego 113, 91-647 Łódź, Poland
e-mail: marcin.kozakiewicz@umed.lodz.pl; katarzyna.bogusiak@gmail.com;
2Department of Cranio-Maxillofacial and Oncological Surgery, Medical University of Łódź
University Hospital Nr. 1
ul. Kopcińskiego 22, 90-153 Łódź, Poland
e-mail: mhanclik@googlemail.com
3Department of Information Technologies, University of Maria Curie-Skłodowska,
Pl. M. Curie-Skłodowskiej 5, 20-031 Lublin, Poland
e-mail: denmar@goblin.umcs.lublin.pl
Received:
Received: 23 December 2008; revised: 22 August 2009; accepted: 16 September 2009; published online: 29 November 2009
DOI: 10.12921/cmst.2009.15.02.161-167
OAI: oai:lib.psnc.pl:671
Abstract:
Purpose: The aim of this research was to compare different methods of geometric alignment produced by two programs developed to be utilized for digital subtraction radiography (DSR). Material and Methods: Material consists of 50 pairs of intra-oral radiographs taken in 50 patients during normal oral clinical treatment. Two programs invented by the authors of this article: ToothVis 1.4 (TV) and DentalStudio 2.0 (DS) software were used in this study. Images obtained by two methods of DSR (cut and divide) and geometrically aligned with four methods were compared with the use of the peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR). Results: Analyzing the
PSNR, it was observed that for cut subtraction its values ranged from 37.93 dB to 39.99 dB. For divide subtraction the PSNR values varied between 39.00 dB (03_pt_DS vs 10_pt_TV) and 47.73 dB (03_pt_TV vs 10_pt_TV). The PSNR achieved higher values for divide than for cut subtraction. Comparing cut and divide subtraction, the PSNR was the lowest for 3-point geometric alignment. Conclusion: Geometric alignment with the ToothVis software combined with divide subtraction gives the best quality of a subtracted image.
Key words:
computer applications – general, digital radiography, efficacy studies, experimental investigations, technical aspects
References:
[1] T.M. Lehmann, H.G. Gröndahl and D.K. Benn, Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 29, 323-346 (2000).
[2] J. Samarabandu, K.M. Allen, E. Hausemann and R. Acharya, Algorithm for the automated alignment of radiographs for image subtraction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 77, 75-79 (1994).
[3] D.C. Yoon, A new method for the automated alignment of dental radiographs for digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 29, 11-19 (2000).
[4] D.J. Rudolph and S.C. White, Filmholding instrument for intraoral subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 65, 767-772 (1988).
[5] E.B. Nery, J.W. Olson, J.M. Henkin and J.H. Kalbfleish, Filmholder device for radiographic assessment of periodontal tissues. J Periodont Res 20, 97-105 (1985).
[6] L.C. Carpio, E. Haosmann, R.G. Dunford, K.M. Allen and L.A. Christersson, Evaluation of a simple modified radiograph alignment system for routine use. J Periodontol 65, 62-67 (1994).
[7] I. Sewerin, Device for serial intraoral radiography with controlled projection angels. Dan Dent J 94, 613-616 (1990).
[8] A. Wenzel and I. Sewerin, Sources of noise in digital radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 71, 503- 508 (1991).
[9] U. Zappa, C. Simona, H. Graf and J. van Aken, In vivo determination of radiographic projection errors produced by a novel filmholder and x-ray beam manipulator. J Periodontol 62, 674-683 (1991).
[10] P. Güneri, S. Goğüş, Z. Tuğsel, A. Ozturk, C. Gungor, and H. Boyacioğlu, Clinical efficacy of a new software developed for dental digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35, 417-421 (2006).
[11] M. Kozakiewicz, K. Bogusiak, M. Hanclik, M. Denkowski and P. Arkuszewski, Noise in subtraction images made from pairs of intraoral radiographs: a comparison between four methods of geometric alignment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37, 1-7 (2008).
[12] T.M. Lehmann, H.G. Gröndahl and D.K. Benn, Review Article. Computer-based registration for digital substraction in dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 29, 323-346 (2000).
[13] A. Saul, W. T. Teukolsky and B.P. Vetterling, Flannery. Numerical Recipes in C++. In: William H., editor. Numerical Recipes in C++: The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002, p. 412.
[14] D. Hearn and P. Baker, Computer graphics with open GL. 3 rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 420-458 (2003).
[15] D. Solomon, Data compression. The complete reference. Berlin: Springer 240-242 (2000).
[16] M. Tur and E.L. Goldstein, Dependence of error rate on signal-to-noise ratio in fiber-optic communication systems with phase-induced intensity noise. Journal of Lightwave Technology 12, 2055-2058 (1989).
Purpose: The aim of this research was to compare different methods of geometric alignment produced by two programs developed to be utilized for digital subtraction radiography (DSR). Material and Methods: Material consists of 50 pairs of intra-oral radiographs taken in 50 patients during normal oral clinical treatment. Two programs invented by the authors of this article: ToothVis 1.4 (TV) and DentalStudio 2.0 (DS) software were used in this study. Images obtained by two methods of DSR (cut and divide) and geometrically aligned with four methods were compared with the use of the peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR). Results: Analyzing the
PSNR, it was observed that for cut subtraction its values ranged from 37.93 dB to 39.99 dB. For divide subtraction the PSNR values varied between 39.00 dB (03_pt_DS vs 10_pt_TV) and 47.73 dB (03_pt_TV vs 10_pt_TV). The PSNR achieved higher values for divide than for cut subtraction. Comparing cut and divide subtraction, the PSNR was the lowest for 3-point geometric alignment. Conclusion: Geometric alignment with the ToothVis software combined with divide subtraction gives the best quality of a subtracted image.
Key words:
computer applications – general, digital radiography, efficacy studies, experimental investigations, technical aspects
References:
[1] T.M. Lehmann, H.G. Gröndahl and D.K. Benn, Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 29, 323-346 (2000).
[2] J. Samarabandu, K.M. Allen, E. Hausemann and R. Acharya, Algorithm for the automated alignment of radiographs for image subtraction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 77, 75-79 (1994).
[3] D.C. Yoon, A new method for the automated alignment of dental radiographs for digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 29, 11-19 (2000).
[4] D.J. Rudolph and S.C. White, Filmholding instrument for intraoral subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 65, 767-772 (1988).
[5] E.B. Nery, J.W. Olson, J.M. Henkin and J.H. Kalbfleish, Filmholder device for radiographic assessment of periodontal tissues. J Periodont Res 20, 97-105 (1985).
[6] L.C. Carpio, E. Haosmann, R.G. Dunford, K.M. Allen and L.A. Christersson, Evaluation of a simple modified radiograph alignment system for routine use. J Periodontol 65, 62-67 (1994).
[7] I. Sewerin, Device for serial intraoral radiography with controlled projection angels. Dan Dent J 94, 613-616 (1990).
[8] A. Wenzel and I. Sewerin, Sources of noise in digital radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 71, 503- 508 (1991).
[9] U. Zappa, C. Simona, H. Graf and J. van Aken, In vivo determination of radiographic projection errors produced by a novel filmholder and x-ray beam manipulator. J Periodontol 62, 674-683 (1991).
[10] P. Güneri, S. Goğüş, Z. Tuğsel, A. Ozturk, C. Gungor, and H. Boyacioğlu, Clinical efficacy of a new software developed for dental digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35, 417-421 (2006).
[11] M. Kozakiewicz, K. Bogusiak, M. Hanclik, M. Denkowski and P. Arkuszewski, Noise in subtraction images made from pairs of intraoral radiographs: a comparison between four methods of geometric alignment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37, 1-7 (2008).
[12] T.M. Lehmann, H.G. Gröndahl and D.K. Benn, Review Article. Computer-based registration for digital substraction in dental radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 29, 323-346 (2000).
[13] A. Saul, W. T. Teukolsky and B.P. Vetterling, Flannery. Numerical Recipes in C++. In: William H., editor. Numerical Recipes in C++: The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002, p. 412.
[14] D. Hearn and P. Baker, Computer graphics with open GL. 3 rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 420-458 (2003).
[15] D. Solomon, Data compression. The complete reference. Berlin: Springer 240-242 (2000).
[16] M. Tur and E.L. Goldstein, Dependence of error rate on signal-to-noise ratio in fiber-optic communication systems with phase-induced intensity noise. Journal of Lightwave Technology 12, 2055-2058 (1989).
