Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Accuracy of digitally enhanced images compared with unprocessed digital images in the detection of external root resorption

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

This study was for comparing the accuracy of processed digital images (reverse-contrast and colorization) with that of unprocessed digital images in detection of external root resorption (ERR).

Methods

Eighty single-rooted human teeth were selected for this study. Mild, moderate, and severe ERR were simulated on 20 teeth each, and 20 were left untreated. Digital images using the paralleling technique were made, and three types of images were finally produced: unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized. Three experienced dentists examined the images. The Wilson confidence intervals were calculated to analyze the diagnostic data. The kappa statistic was used to determine interobserver agreement.

Results

For unprocessed images, the rate of correct classification of mild and moderate to severe ERR was 88.3 and 80.0 %, respectively. The corresponding rate for reverse-contrast images was 81.7 and 80.0 %, and that for colorized images was 93.3 and 80.0 %, respectively. The sensitivity of unprocessed images in the detection of mild and moderate to severe ERR was 0.93 and 0.84, respectively. The corresponding sensitivity for reverse-contrast images was 0.83 and 0.84, and that for colorized images was 0.93 and 0.84, respectively. The specificity of unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized images was 0.90, 0.92, and 1.00, respectively. The kappa coefficient for interobserver agreement was 0.86 for unprocessed images, 0.88 for reverse-contrast images, and 0.89 for colorized images. The difference between the sensitivity and specificity of unprocessed, reverse-contrast, and colorized images was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

The three techniques were of similar and desirable accuracy in detection of ERR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartok RI, Văideanu T, Dimitriu B, Vârlan CM, Suciu I, Podoleanu D. External radicular resorption: selected cases and review of the literature. J Med Life. 2012;5:145–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 5th ed. London: Mosby; 2004. p. 335.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ono E, Medici Filho E, Faig Leite H, Tanaka JL, De Moraes ME, De Melo Castilho JC. Evaluation of simulated external root resorptions with digital radiography and digital subtraction radiography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;139:324–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Westphalen VP, Gomes de Moraes I, Westphalen FH, Martins WD, Souza PH. Conventional and digital radiographic methods in the detection of simulated external root resorptions: a comparative study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:233–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Westphalen VP, Moraes IG, Westphalen FH. Efficacy of conventional and digital radiographic imaging methods for diagnosis of simulated external root resorption. J Appl Oral Sci. 2004;12:108–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dalili Z, Taramsari M, Mousavi Mehr SZ, Salamat F. Diagnostic value of two modes of cone-beam computed tomography in evaluation of simulated external root resorption: an in vitro study. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42:19–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ren H, Chen J, Deng F, Zheng L, Liu X, Dong Y. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography for detecting simulated apical root resorption. Angle Orthod. 2013;83:189–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shokri A, Mortazavi H, Salemi F, Javadian A, Bakhtiari H, Matlabi H. Diagnosis of simulated external root resorption using conventional intraoral film radiography, CCD, PSP, and CBCT: a comparison study. Biomed J. 2013;36:18–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Versteeg CH, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF. Efficacy of digital intra-oral radiography in clinical dentistry. J Dent. 1997;25:215–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alpöz E, Soğur E, Baksi Akdeniz BG. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after application of various image processing algorithms. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36:490–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB, Platin E, Nair M. A comparison of Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film and the Siemens Sidexis digital imaging system for caries detection using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;85:113–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kositbowornchai S, Basiw M, Promwang Y, Moragorn H, Sooksuntisakoonchai N. Accuracy of diagnosing occlusal caries using enhanced digital images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:236–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kullendorff B, Nilsson M. Diagnostic accuracy of direct digital dental radiography for the detection of periapical bone lesions. II. Effects on diagnostic accuracy after application of image processing. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1996;82:585–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zangooei Booshehry M, Davari A, Ezoddini Ardakani F, Rashidi Nejad MR. Efficacy of application of pseudocolor filters in the detection of interproximal caries. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2010;4:79–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Shi XQ, Li G. Detection accuracy of approximal caries by black-and-white and color-coded digital radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:433–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tofangchiha M, Bakhshi M, Shariati M, Valizadeh S, Adel M, Sobouti F. Detection of vertical root fractures using digitally enhanced images: reverse-contrast and colorization. Dent Traumatol. 2012;28:478–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Unal GC, Aydin U, Orhan H. The effect of different image processing features in a digital radiography system on the clarity of the endodontic file tips. GU Dishek Fak Derg. 2005;22:13–9 (In Turkish).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Li G, Engström PE, Welander U. Measurement accuracy of marginal bone level in digital radiographs with and without color coding. Acta Odontol Scand. 2007;65:254–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Scaf G, Morihisa O, Loffredo Lde C. Comparison between inverted and unprocessed digitized radiographic imaging in periodontal bone loss measurements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2007;15:492–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Bortoluzzi EA, Souza EM, Reis JM, Esberard RM, Tanomaru-Filho M. Fracture strength of bovine incisors after intra-radicular treatment with MTA in an experimental immature tooth model. Int Endod J. 2007;40:684–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Soares CJ, Pizi EC, Fonseca RB, Martins LR. Influence of root embedment material and periodontal ligament simulation on fracture resistance tests. Braz Oral Res. 2005;19:11–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Caldas Mde P, Ramos-Perez FM, de Almeida SM, Haiter-Neto F. Comparative evaluation among different materials to replace soft tissue in oral radiology studies. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010;18:264–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Verdonschot EH, Kuijpers JM, Polder BJ, De Leng-Worm MH, Bronkhorst EM. Effects of digital grey-scale modification on the diagnosis of small approximal carious lesions. J Dent. 1992;20:44–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Molon RSd, Verzola MHA, Paquier TM, Morais-Camillo JAND, Trindade-Suedam IK, Loffredo LDCM, et al. Detection of simulated periodontal bone defects using digital images. An in vitro study. Arch Clin Exp Surg. 2014;3:220–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mistak EJ, Loushine RJ, Primack PD, West LA, Runyan DA. Interpretation of periapical lesions comparing conventional, direct digital, and telephonically transmitted radiographic images. J Endod. 1998;24:262–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. De Araujo EA, Castilho JC, Medici Filho E, de Moraes ME. Comparison of direct digital and conventional imaging with Ekta Speed Plus and INSIGHT films for the detection of approximal caries. Am J Dent. 2005;18:241–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wenzel A, Fejerskov O. Validity of diagnosis of questionable caries lesions in occlusal surfaces of extracted third molars. Caries Res. 1992;26:188–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Tehran University of Medical Sciences, International Campus (Grant No. 8723102002).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oral Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, International Campus, Tehran, Iran

    Zahra Ghoncheh

  2. Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, International Campus, Tehran, Iran

    Farzaneh Afkhami

  3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Public Health, Dental School, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammad Javad Kharazi Fard

  4. Dr. Sorkhabi Clinic, Private Practice, Tehran, Iran

    Rasa Ebrahimi Sorkhabi

  5. Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Baskent University, 11. Sokak, No. 26, Bahcelievler, 06490, Ankara, Turkey

    Ulkem Aydin

Authors
  1. Zahra Ghoncheh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Farzaneh Afkhami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Javad Kharazi Fard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rasa Ebrahimi Sorkhabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ulkem Aydin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulkem Aydin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Zahra Ghoncheh, Farzaneh Afkhami, Mohammed Javad Kharazi Fard, Rasa Ebrahimi Sorkhabi, and Ulkem Aydin declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human rights statements

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghoncheh, Z., Afkhami, F., Fard, M.J.K. et al. Accuracy of digitally enhanced images compared with unprocessed digital images in the detection of external root resorption. Oral Radiol 33, 133–139 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0258-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0258-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation