Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of digital filters on the diagnosis of simulated root resorptions in digital radiographic systems

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the influence of digital filters of intraoral radiographic systems on the diagnosis of simulated internal and external root resorptions and image quality.

Materials and methods

Internal root resorption (IRR) and external root resorption (ERR) were simulated in 34 teeth. For image acquisition, two radiographic systems were used: Digora Toto and VistaScan. All filters available in these systems were applied. Three observers scored the detection of root resorptions in a 5-point scale. The noise and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The area under ROC curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were obtained. One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc tests compared the diagnostic values, noise, and CNR between the filters (α = 0.05).

Results

For ERR, there were no significant differences in diagnostic values between the filters tested for both systems. For IRR, Original and Noise Reduction filters presented higher sensitivity than the Sharpen2 filter for images from Digora Toto, with no differences between the other groups. For VistaScan, there were no significant differences of diagnostic values between the groups studied. Noise values differed among the filters of both systems. The CNR of the filters differed only for the bone region for Digora Toto, while for VistaScan, both tooth and bone regions differed.

Conclusions

Despite promoting changes in pixel intensities and affecting the noise level of the radiographic images, the digital filters of Digora Toto and VistaScan systems do not affect the diagnosis of internal or external root resorptions.

Clinical relevance

Digital filters are common tools in digital radiographic systems and may be used by the professional without impairment in root resorptions diagnosis.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vidor MM, Liedke GS, Vizzotto MB et al (2017) Imaging evaluating of the implant/bone interface—an in vitro radiographic study. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 46:20160296. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brasil DM, Yamasaki MC, Santaella GM et al (2018) Influence of VistaScan image enhancement filters on diagnosis of simulated periapical lesions on intraoral radiographs. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 48:20180146. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20180146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Oliveira-Santos N, Michels M, Freitas DQ et al (2019) Influence of phosphor plate–based radiographic image specifications on fractal analysis of alveolar bone. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 128:418–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2019.06.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Haiter-Neto F, Spinelli Casanova M, Frydenberg M, Wenzel A (2009) Task-specific enhancement filters in storage phosphor images from the Vistascan system for detection of proximal caries lesions of known size. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 107:116–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.09.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. de Azevedo Vaz SL, Neves FS, Figueirêdo EP et al (2013) Accuracy of enhancement filters in measuring in vitro peri-implant bone level. Clin Oral Implants Res 24:1074–1077. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02511.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nascimento HAR, Ramos ACA, Neves FS et al (2015) The ‘Sharpen’ filter improves the radiographic detection of vertical root fractures. Int Endod J 48:428–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Darcey J, Qualtrough A (2013) Resorption: Part 1. Pathology, classification and aetiology. Br Dent J 214:439–451. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lima TF, Gamba TO, Zaia AA, Soares AJ (2016) Evaluation of cone beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in the diagnosis of root resorption. Aust Dent J 61:425–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nascimento EHL, Gaêta-Araujo H, Galvão NS et al (2019) Effect of brightness and contrast variation for detectability of root resorption lesions in digital intraoral radiographs. Clin Oral Investig 23:3379–3386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2764-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Clark JL, Wadhwani CP, Abramovitch K et al (2018) Effect of image sharpening on radiographic image quality. J Prosthet Dent: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.034

  11. Gaêta-Araujo H, Nascimento EHL, Oliveira-Santos N et al (2020) Influence of adjacent teeth restored with metal posts in the detection of simulated internal root resorption using CBCT. Int Endod J 53:1299–1306. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sousa Melo SL, de Faria Vasconcelos K, Holton N et al (2017) Impact of cone-beam computed tomography scan mode on the diagnostic yield of chemically simulated external root resorption. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 151:1073–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Belém MDF, Tabchoury CPM, Ferreira-Santos RI et al (2013) Performance of a photostimulable storage phosphor digital system with or without the sharpen filter and cone beam CT for detecting approximal enamel subsurface demineralization. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 42:20120313. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Brüllmann DD, Kempkes B, D’Hoedt B, Schulze R (2013) Contrast curves of five different intraoral X-ray sensors: A technical note. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 115:e55–e61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A (2007) G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 39:175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Altman DG, Bland JM (1995) Statistics notes: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. BMJ 311:485–485. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7003.485

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gaêta-Araujo H, Nascimento EHL, Oliveira-Santos N et al (2020) Effect of digital enhancement on the radiographic assessment of vertical root fractures in the presence of different intracanal materials: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig: 4–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03353-x

  19. Costa ED, Brasil DM, Gaêta-Araujo H et al (2021) Do image enhancement filters in complementary metal oxide semiconductor and photostimulable phosphor imaging systems improve the detection of fractured endodontic instruments in periapical radiography? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 131:247–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2020.07.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ren H, Chen J, Deng F et al (2013) Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography for detecting simulated apical root resorption. Angle Orthod 83:189–195. https://doi.org/10.2319/050512-372.1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Creanga AG, Geha H, Sankar V et al (2015) Accuracy of digital periapical radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in detecting external root resorption. Imaging Sci Dent 45:153–158. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2015.45.3.153

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Wenzel A, Sewerin I (1991) Sources of noise in digital subtraction radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 71:503–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(91)90441-E

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Huda W, Abrahams RB (2015) Radiographic techniques, contrast, and noise in x-ray imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:W126–W131. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Soares LE, Freitas DQ, de Lima KL et al (2021) Application of image processing techniques to aid in the detection of vertical root fractures in digital periapical radiography. Clin Oral Investig 25:5077–5085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03820-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior — Brasil (CAPES) — Finance Code 001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Av. Limeira, 901, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, 13414-903, Brazil

    Nicolly Oliveira-Santos, Débora Costa Ruiz, Eduarda Helena Leandro Nascimento & Wilson Gustavo Cral

  2. School of Dentistry, Federal University of Alfenas (UNIFAL-MG), Alfenas, Minas Gerais, Brazil

    Hugo Gaêta-Araujo

  3. Department of Dentistry, Division of Oral Radiology, Odontomed Imagem - Medical and Dental Services, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil

    Eduarda Helena Leandro Nascimento

  4. Department of Oral Diagnosis & Oral Health, University of Louisville School of Dentistry, Louisville, KY, USA

    Christiano Oliveira-Santos

  5. Department of Biosciences, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil

    Francisco Carlos Groppo

Authors
  1. Nicolly Oliveira-Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hugo Gaêta-Araujo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Débora Costa Ruiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eduarda Helena Leandro Nascimento
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wilson Gustavo Cral
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christiano Oliveira-Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Francisco Carlos Groppo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolly Oliveira-Santos.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This study design was approved by the local Institutional Ethics Committee under protocol number #57589316.0.0000.5418, and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

The formal consent is not applicable for this type of research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oliveira-Santos, N., Gaêta-Araujo, H., Ruiz, D.C. et al. The impact of digital filters on the diagnosis of simulated root resorptions in digital radiographic systems. Clin Oral Invest 26, 4743–4752 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04438-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04438-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation