The effects of noise reduction, sharpening, enhancement, and image magnification on diagnostic accuracy of a photostimulable phosphor system in the detection of non-cavitated approximal dental caries.
- Author:
Zahra Dalili KAJAN
1
;
Reza TAYEFEH DAVALLOO
;
Mayam TAVANGAR
;
Fatemeh VALIZADE
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Dental Caries; Dental Digital Radiography; Image Enhancement
- MeSH: Dental Caries*; Humans; Image Enhancement; Noise*; Radiography, Dental, Digital; Tooth
- From:Imaging Science in Dentistry 2015;45(2):81-87
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Contrast, sharpness, enhancement, and density can be changed in digital systems. The important question is to what extent the changes in these variables affect the accuracy of caries detection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty eight extracted human posterior teeth with healthy or proximal caries surfaces were imaged using a photostimulable phosphor (PSP) sensor. All original images were processed using a six-step method: (1) applying "Sharpening 2" and "Noise Reduction" processing options to the original images; (2) applying the "Magnification 1:3" option to the image obtained in the first step; (3) enhancing the original images by using the "Diagonal/" option; (4) reviewing the changes brought about by the third step of image processing and then, applying "Magnification 1:3"; (5) applying "Sharpening UM" to the original images; and (6) analyzing the changes brought about by the fifth step of image processing, and finally, applying "Magnification 1:3." Three observers evaluated the images. The tooth sections were evaluated histologically as the gold standard. The diagnostic accuracy of the observers was compared using a chi-squared test. RESULTS: The accuracy levels irrespective of the image processing method ranged from weak (18.8%) to intermediate (54.2%), but the highest accuracy was achieved at the sixth image processing step. The overall diagnostic accuracy level showed a statistically significant difference (p=0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the application of "Sharpening UM" along with the "Magnification 1:3" processing option improved the diagnostic accuracy and the observer agreement more effectively than the other processing procedures.
