A comparison of 18 different x-ray detectors currently used in dentistry

被引:103
|
作者
Farman, AG [1 ]
Farman, TT [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Louisville, Sch Dent, Dept Surg & Hosp Dent, Louisville, KY 40292 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.04.002
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose. There has been a proliferation of available dental x-ray detectors over the recent past. The purpose of this short technical report is to provide a basic comparison of spatial resolution, contrast perceptibility, and relative exposure latitudes of 18 current dental x-ray detectors, including solid-state systems (CCD and CMOS), photostimulable phosphors, and analog film. Methods. Spatial resolution was measured using a 0.025 mm Pb phantom test grid with a measurement range from 1.5 to 20 lp/mm. For contrast perceptibility, a 7-mm thick aluminum perceptibility test device with wells of 0.1-0.9 mm depth at 0.1 mm intervals and I defect of 1.5 mm was used. The relative exposure latitude was determined by expert consensus using clear discrimination of the enamel-dentin junction as the lower limit and pixel blooming or unacceptable levels of cervical burnout as the upper limit. Results. The highest spatial resolution was found with Kodak InSight film, RVG-ui (CCD), and RVG 6000 (CMOS) detectors, each of which achieved 20 lp/mm, followed by the Planmeca Dixi2 v3 at >= 16 lp/mm. Contrast resolution was at least to 0.2 mm through 7 mm aluminum for all 18 detectors, with the best results being found for the Visualix HDI, RVG-ui, RVG 5000, and RVG 6000 detectors and the Schick CDR wired and wireless systems. The greatest exposure ranges were found with photostimulable phosphors and the Kodak RVG 6000 and RVG 5000 detectors. Conclusions. Most current x-ray detectors generally perform well in terms of spatial and contrast resolutions, and in terms of exposure latitude. These findings were independent of the modality applied.
引用
收藏
页码:485 / 489
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparison of 18 different X-ray detectors used in dentistry
    Farman, AG
    Farman, TT
    CARS 2004: COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOLOGY AND SURGERY, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, 1268 : 1375 - 1375
  • [2] Comparison of different GaAs detectors for X-ray digital radiography
    Bencivelli, W.
    Bertin, R.
    Bertolucci, E.
    Bottigli, U.
    D'Auria, S.
    Del Papa, C.
    Fantacci, M.E.
    Randaccio, P.
    Rosso, V.
    Stefanini, A.
    Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, 1994, A338 (2-3) : 549 - 555
  • [3] COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT GAAS DETECTORS FOR X-RAY DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY
    BENCIVELLI, W
    BERTIN, R
    BERTOLUCCI, E
    BOTTIGLI, U
    DAURIA, S
    DELPAPA, C
    FANTACCI, ME
    RANDACCIO, P
    ROSSO, V
    STEFANINI, A
    NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS & METHODS IN PHYSICS RESEARCH SECTION A-ACCELERATORS SPECTROMETERS DETECTORS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT, 1994, 338 (2-3): : 549 - 555
  • [4] The X-ray response of CdZnTe detectors to be used as future spectroscopic detectors for X-ray astronomy
    Kraft, S
    Bavdaz, M
    Castelletto, B
    Peacock, A
    Scholze, F
    Ulm, G
    Gagliardi, MA
    Nenonen, S
    Tuomi, T
    Juvonen, M
    Rantamaki, R
    NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS & METHODS IN PHYSICS RESEARCH SECTION A-ACCELERATORS SPECTROMETERS DETECTORS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT, 1998, 418 (2-3): : 337 - 347
  • [5] COMPARISON OF DETECTORS USED IN MEASUREMENT OF 10 TO 300 KEV X-RAY SPECTRA
    ISRAEL, HI
    LIER, DW
    STORM, E
    NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS & METHODS, 1971, 91 (02): : 141 - +
  • [6] A PHYSICAL COMPARISON OF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE MAMMOGRAPHIC X-RAY MACHINES
    HYDE, R
    FITZGERALD, M
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1988, 61 (725): : 438 - 438
  • [7] A comparison of x-ray detectors for mouse CT imaging
    Goertzen, AL
    Nagarkar, V
    Street, RA
    Paulus, MJ
    Boone, JM
    Cherry, SR
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2004, 49 (23): : 5251 - 5265
  • [8] Comparison of natural and synthetic diamond X-ray detectors
    S. P. Lansley
    G. T. Betzel
    P. Metcalfe
    L. Reinisch
    J. Meyer
    Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 2010, 33 : 301 - 306
  • [9] Comparison of natural and synthetic diamond X-ray detectors
    Lansley, S. P.
    Betzel, G. T.
    Metcalfe, P.
    Reinisch, L.
    Meyer, J.
    AUSTRALASIAN PHYSICAL & ENGINEERING SCIENCES IN MEDICINE, 2010, 33 (04) : 301 - 306
  • [10] Comparison of mercuric iodide and lead iodide X-ray detectors for X-ray imaging applications
    Zentai, G
    Partain, L
    Pavlyuchkova, R
    Proano, C
    Schieber, M
    Shah, K
    Bennett, P
    2004 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM CONFERENCE RECORD, VOLS 1-7, 2004, : 2278 - 2282