Queiroz Polyane M, Oliveira Matheus L, Tanaka Jefferson L O, Soares Milton G, Haiter-Neto Francisco, Ono Evelise
1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, Area of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
2 Department of Dental Radiology and Imaging, Brazilian Dental Association, Ponta Grossa, Parana, Brazil.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016;45(7):20160120. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20160120. Epub 2016 Jul 19.
To evaluate three methods of geometric image reconstruction for digital subtraction radiography (DSR).
Digital periapical radiographs were acquired of 24 teeth with the X-ray tube at 6 different geometric configurations of vertical (V) and horizontal (H) angles: V0°H0°, V0°H10°, V10°H0°, V10°H10°, V20°H0° and V20°H10°. All 144 images were registered in pairs (Group V0°H0° + 1 of the 6 groups) 3 times by using the Emago(®) (Oral Diagnostic Systems, Amsterdam, Netherlands) with manual selection and Regeemy with manual and automatic selections. After geometric reconstruction on the two software applications under different modes of selection, all images were subtracted and the standard deviation of grey values was obtained as a measure of image noise. All measurements were repeated after 15 days to evaluate the method error. Values of image noise were statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA for differences between methods and between projection angles, followed by Tukey's test at a level of significance of 5%.
Significant differences were found between most of the projection angles for the three reconstruction methods. Image subtraction after manual selection-based reconstruction on Regeemy presented the lowest values of image noise, except on group V0°H0°. The groups V10°H0° and V20°H0° were not significantly different between the manual selection-based reconstruction in Regeemy and automatic selection-based reconstruction in Regeemy methods.
The Regeemy software on manual mode revealed better quality of geometric image reconstruction for DSR than the Regeemy on automatic mode and the Emago on manual mode, when the radiographic images were obtained at V and H angles used in the present investigation.
评估数字减影X线摄影(DSR)的三种几何图像重建方法。
使用X射线管在垂直(V)和水平(H)角度的6种不同几何配置下,获取24颗牙齿的数字化根尖片:V0°H0°、V0°H10°、V10°H0°、V10°H10°、V20°H0°和V20°H10°。使用Emago®(荷兰阿姆斯特丹口腔诊断系统公司)通过手动选择以及使用Regeemy通过手动和自动选择,将所有144幅图像以两两配对(V0°H0°组 + 6组中的1组)的方式进行3次配准。在两种软件应用程序上,于不同选择模式下进行几何重建后,对所有图像进行相减,并获取灰度值的标准差作为图像噪声的度量。15天后重复所有测量以评估方法误差。通过单因素方差分析对图像噪声值进行统计分析,以比较方法之间以及投影角度之间的差异,随后进行显著性水平为5%的Tukey检验。
三种重建方法在大多数投影角度之间存在显著差异。基于Regeemy手动选择重建后的图像相减呈现出最低的图像噪声值,但V0°H0°组除外。在Regeemy方法中,V10°H0°组和V20°H0°组在基于手动选择的重建和基于自动选择的重建之间无显著差异。
当在本研究中使用的V和H角度获取射线照片时,手动模式下的Regeemy软件在DSR的几何图像重建质量方面优于自动模式下的Regeemy软件和手动模式下的Emago软件。