Dantas Raquel Venâncio Fernandes, Sarmento Hugo Ramalho, Duarte Rosângela Marques, Meireles Monte Raso Sônia Saeger, de Andrade Ana Karina Maciel, Dos Anjos-Pontual Maria Luiza
Graduate Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.
Imaging Sci Dent. 2013 Sep;43(3):145-51. doi: 10.5624/isd.2013.43.3.145. Epub 2013 Sep 23.
This study was performed to evaluate and compare the radiopacity of dentin, enamel, and 8 restorative composites on conventional radiograph and digital images with different resolutions.
Specimens were fabricated from 8 materials and human molars were longitudinally sectioned 1.0 mm thick to include both enamel and dentin. The specimens and tooth sections were imaged by conventional radiograph using #4 sized intraoral film and digital images were taken in high speed and high resolution modes using a phosphor storage plate. Densitometric evaluation of the enamel, dentin, restorative materials, a lead sheet, and an aluminum step wedge was performed on the radiographic images. For the evaluation, the Al equivalent (mm) for each material was calculated. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<0.05), considering the material factor and then the radiographic method factor, individually.
The high speed mode allowed the highest radiopacity, while the high resolution mode generated the lowest values. Furthermore, the high resolution mode was the most efficient method for radiographic differentiation between restorative composites and dentin. The conventional radiograph was the most effective in enabling differentiation between enamel and composites. The high speed mode was the least effective in enabling radiographic differentiation between the dental tissues and restorative composites.
The high speed mode of digital imaging was not effective for differentiation between enamel and composites. This made it less effective than the high resolution mode and conventional radiographs. All of the composites evaluated showed radiopacity values that fit the ISO 4049 recommendations.
本研究旨在评估和比较牙本质、牙釉质以及8种修复性复合材料在传统X线片和不同分辨率数字图像上的射线不透性。
用8种材料制作标本，并将人类磨牙纵向切成1.0毫米厚，使其包含牙釉质和牙本质。使用#4尺寸口内胶片通过传统X线片对标本和牙齿切片进行成像，并使用磷光存储板以高速和高分辨率模式拍摄数字图像。对X线片图像上的牙釉质、牙本质、修复材料、铅板和铝阶梯楔进行密度测定评估。为进行评估，计算每种材料的铝当量（毫米）。分别考虑材料因素和射线照相方法因素，使用单因素方差分析和Tukey检验（p<0.05）对数据进行分析。
高速模式下射线不透性最高，而高分辨率模式下的值最低。此外，高分辨率模式是区分修复性复合材料和牙本质的射线照相最有效方法。传统X线片在区分牙釉质和复合材料方面最有效。高速模式在区分牙齿组织和修复性复合材料的射线照相方面最无效。
数字成像的高速模式在区分牙釉质和复合材料方面无效。这使其比高分辨率模式和传统X线片效果更差。所有评估的复合材料的射线不透性值均符合ISO 4049建议。
