Kitagawa H, Scheetz J P, Farman A G
School of Dentistry, The University of Louisville, 501 South Preston Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40292, USA.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2003 Nov;32(6):408-11. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/19990417.
To compare the subjective image quality of the newer generation Schick CDR detector employing complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) technology with images using the earlier generation charge-coupled device (CCD) Schick CDR detector.
All radiographic images were made using the same formalin-fixed adult cadaver maxilla with surrounding natural soft tissues in place. The X-ray generator used was a Villa Sistemi Medicali Diamatic srl AP/Explor X operated at 70 kVp and 8 mA. The source-to-detector distance was set at 38 cm and an optical bench was used to ensure reproducible beam geometry. A range of exposures was applied for both detectors. A panel of nine dentists independently observed and evaluated images made at each exposure. For both detectors, the three images ranked highest were randomized for re-evaluation in panels of six images. Each image was repeated randomly a total of 10 times. Features chosen as observation points were: (1) proximal dental caries; (2) gingival soft tissues; (3) cortical bone; (4) root canal space; (5) root apices; (6) periodontal ligament space; and (7) endodontic instrument tip clarity. Comparisons were made by use of odds ratio analysis applying a 95% confidence level. Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were computed to assess consistency in observer ratings.
The CMOS sensor was rated as outperforming its CCD predecessor for depiction of cortical bone and root apices; the CCD detector was only rated superior for depiction of root canal space. No significant difference was found between the two detectors in perceived depiction of proximal dental caries, gingival soft tissues, periodontal ligament space or endodontic instruments. Combining rating scores from each of the tasks, CMOS and CCD detectors had a similar proportion of image ratings of excellent, acceptable and poor.
Regarding subjective image quality, the Schick CMOS and CCD detectors were perceived to produce radiographic images of similar overall quality.
比较采用互补金属氧化物半导体（CMOS）技术的新一代施乐辉CDR探测器与早期电荷耦合器件（CCD）施乐辉CDR探测器所成图像的主观图像质量。
所有口腔X光片均使用同一个用福尔马林固定、带有周围天然软组织的成年尸体上颌骨拍摄。所用的X射线发生器是一台维拉医疗系统公司的Diamatic srl AP/Explor X，工作电压为70 kVp，电流为8 mA。源到探测器的距离设定为38 cm，并使用光学平台确保射束几何形状可重复。对两种探测器均施加一系列曝光。由九名牙医组成的小组独立观察并评估每次曝光所成的图像。对于两种探测器，将排名最高的三张图像随机抽取用于在六张图像的小组中重新评估。每张图像总共随机重复10次。选为观察点的特征有：（1）邻面龋齿；（2）牙龈软组织；（3）皮质骨；（4）根管腔；（5）根尖；（6）牙周膜间隙；（7）根管器械尖端清晰度。采用95%置信水平的优势比分析进行比较。计算评分者间和评分者内信度以评估观察者评分的一致性。
在皮质骨和根尖的显示方面，CMOS传感器的评分高于其前代CCD探测器；CCD探测器仅在根管腔的显示方面被评为更优。在邻面龋齿、牙龈软组织、牙周膜间隙或根管器械的感知显示方面，两种探测器之间未发现显著差异。综合各项任务的评分，CMOS和CCD探测器在优秀、可接受和差的图像评分比例上相似。
就主观图像质量而言，施乐辉CMOS和CCD探测器所产生的口腔X光片总体质量相似。
