Comparison between DICOM-calibrated and uncalibrated consumer grade and 6-MP displays under different lighting conditions in panoramic radiography

Influence of the digital file format on radiographic diagnostic in dentistry: a scoping review

Given today's higher demand for online transmission of radiographic images, clinicians and regulatory agencies should be given the evidence they need to guide them in choosing the best image file format to be adopted. To this end, the present scoping review aims to explore, map, and evaluate the literature, with the object of reporting the influence of image file formats on dental diagnostic tasks by assessing intraoral radiographic images. This scoping review complies with PRISMA-ScR. It was customized to assess the risk of bias of the included studies, and was registered on the Open Science Framework platform. The data extraction protocol was developed based on the PCC acronym. An electronic search was conducted in six databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Lilacs, Cochrane) in December 2023. Original articles were screened, having observational, diagnostic accuracy, and consisting of in vivo or ex vivo laboratory studies investigating the influence of file formats on different diagnostic tasks in dentistry. Eighteen studies, published between the years 1996 and 2022, were included. The following data were extracted from the selected articles: article title, authors' citation, publication date, country, diagnostic task, image file formats tested, compression level, and main conclusion. The most widely investigated diagnostic task was caries lesions (n = 10), led by root resorptions (n = 3), root fractures (n = 2), periapical lesions (n = 2), and periodontal disease (n = 1). The most commonly used radiographic techniques were periapical (n = 12) and bitewing (n = 6). The most frequently investigated image file formats were JPEG (all studies) and TIFF (n = 10 studies). BMP, PNG, and JPEG2000 were also included in 7, 3 and 3 studies, respectively. No studies included the DICOM file format. In regard to the subjective assessment of the several dental diagnostic tasks, the studies mostly showed that the influence of the file formats was not significant (n = 10/55.5%). As for the quality assessment of the included papers, more than 70% of the studies featured a low risk of bias. Current evidence on image file formats and dental radiographic diagnosis is reliable. Any image file format can be used without impairing diagnostic accuracy.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Caries and Periapical Lesions on a Monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF Calibration Under Different Ambient Light Conditions

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of caries and periapical lesions on a monitor with and without DICOM part 14: grayscale standard display function (DICOM-GSDF) calibration under different ambient light conditions. Forty digital bitewing radiographs were selected, with or without radiographic images of carious lesions and forty digital periapical radiographs with or without periapical lesions were selected from archives of the Radiology Department at the University Hospital of the Federal University of Sergipe. The gold standard radiographic images were determined through consensus between two radiologists with more than 15 and 30 years of experience. The selected radiographs were evaluated on a LG LED monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration under different ambient light conditions: Lx1 (low ambient lighting), Lx2 (moderate ambient lighting) and Lx3 (high ambient lighting). Kappa (K_w) values determined that evaluator 1 showed almost perfect agreement for all devices, while evaluator 2 presented a substantial agreement for all devices. Monitors with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration have similar accuracy values. The three ambient light conditions analyzed have similar accuracy and can be used for caries lesions diagnosis (p > 0.05); however, the best diagnostic accuracy of periapical lesions was found in Lx 2. The displays with and without DICOM-GSDF calibration studied in this research have similar accuracy and can be used to evaluate digital radiographs without changing the diagnostic capacity. The different ambient lighting conditions did not influence the evaluation of caries lesions. The best diagnostic accuracy of periapical lesions was found in moderate ambient lighting.

The influence of image display systems on observers' preference for visualizing subtle dental radiographic abnormalities

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to assess observers' preference for standard screens (SSs) or medical displays (MDs) in visualizing difficult-to-diagnose radiographic dental abnormalities and their preference for dental filter tools when utilized with MD systems.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective data set of 60 in vivo radiographs consisting of intraoral (n = 20), panoramic (n = 20), and cone beam computed tomography (n = 20) images was created. Three image display monitors, including an SS, an MD, and an MD with 3 dental filter configurations (bone-low density enhancement filter, tooth-high density enhancement filter, and a combined filter representing regular MD), were utilized to assess 4 observers' monitor preferences in detecting radiographically subtle dental abnormalities. The data were analyzed by using binomial distribution. A P value ≤.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Although observers expressed preference for MD for visualizing some abnormalities when examining intraoral and panoramic radiographs, MD was not preferred for detection of any abnormalities with cone beam computed tomography. There were no significant differences in preference for SS or MD overall (P ≥ .2024). Observers expressed significant preference for the filters in visualizing all but 2 abnormalities (P ≤ .0252).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MD monitors enabled with dental filter tools may be preferred for visualizing certain subtle abnormalities.

Influence of interpretation conditions on the subjective differentiation of radiographic contrast of images obtained with a digital intraoral system

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate interpretation conditions in the subjective in vitro assessment of dental tissue-equivalent radiographic contrast.

STUDY DESIGN

Radiographic images with the density of dental structures were randomized and arranged in 20 sequences with images juxtaposed and separated. Twelve observers interpreted the sequence among the most radiolucent and radiopaque images with 3 displays, 3 horizontal viewing angles, and 3 ambient light conditions. The evaluation time was recorded. The hit percentage was calculated for each evaluation. Three-way analysis of variance with Tukey's test was used to compare the conditions of interpretation. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess agreement (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

No differences in hit percentages were found among the 3 displays or among the juxtaposed and separated images. Increased hit percentages were recorded for images assessed at 90° compared with 45° for all displays and in high ambient light vs intermediate and low light at 90°. Increased evaluation time was recorded for the consumer-grade display under high ambient light and for the separated images.

CONCLUSIONS

The subjective in vitro assessment of dental tissue-equivalent radiographic contrast is not influenced by computer display, which should be viewed at a horizontal viewing angle of 90° and under high ambient light. Longer evaluation times may be expected with consumer-grade displays.

Role of ambient light in the detection of contrast elements in digital dental radiography

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different ambient light levels on observer detection of small contrast differences in a contrast phantom by using a high-end liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor.

STUDY DESIGN

An aluminum step wedge was converted into a contrast phantom by the addition of bore holes. Radiographic images of the contrast elements were presented to 20 observers. Images were displayed in random order under different ambient light levels (0, 50, 200, and 500 lux) twice, and the observers had to determine if contrast elements were visible. Sensitivity and specificity were determined to calculate areas under receiver operating characteristic curves and Friedmann's test was applied to evaluate the influence of the ambient light level on observer performance.

RESULTS

Mean AZ values were moderate for each ambient light level at 0.715, 0.793, 0.764, and 0.722 for 0, 50, 200, and 500 lux, respectively. The influence of the ambient light level on observer performance was not statistically significant (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant influence of ambient light between 0 and 500 lux on observer ability to detect small contrast details displayed on a high-end LCD monitor.

Comparison of a Medical-Grade Monitor vs Commercial Off-the-Shelf Display for Mitotic Figure Enumeration and Small Object (Helicobacter pylori) Detection

OBJECTIVES

To examine the performance of a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) monitor vs a medical-grade (MG) monitor for small object enumeration in standardized digital pathology images.

METHODS

Pathologists reviewed 35 melanoma or 35 gastric biopsy images using the MG and COTS displays, with a 2-week washout period. Mitotic figure or Helicobacter pylori burden enumerations were compared with reference values reported by an expert subspecialist pathologist using a light microscope. Subjective evaluations of image color, brightness, and overall quality were also obtained.

RESULTS

There was substantial agreement between the mitotic counts obtained by the evaluating pathologists between monitors and the reference mitotic figure or H pylori burden assessments. Six of the nine evaluating pathologists subjectively evaluated the monitors as substantially similar.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are consistent with previous studies demonstrating that color calibration has limited impact on diagnostic accuracy and suggest that noncalibrated displays could be considered for fine assessment tasks.

Effect of display type, DICOM calibration and room illuminance in bitewing radiographs

OBJECTIVES

To compare observer performance in the detection of both anatomical structures and caries in bitewing radiographs using consumer grade displays with and without digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) calibration, tablets (third generation iPad; Apple, Cupertino, CA) and 6-megapixel (MP) displays under different lighting.

METHODS

30 bitewing radiographs were blindly evaluated on four displays under bright (510 lx) and dim (16 lx) ambient lighting by two observers. The dentinoenamel junction, enamel and dentinal caries, and the cortical border of the alveolar crests were evaluated. Consensus was considered as reference. Intraobserver agreement was determined. The proportion of equivalent ratings and weighted kappa were used to assess reliability.

RESULTS

The proportion of equivalent ratings with consensus differed significantly between uncalibrated and DICOM-calibrated consumer grade display in enamel caries in upper and lower molars in bright (p = 0.013 and p = 0.003) lighting, and in dentinal caries in lower molars in both bright (p = 0.022) and dim (p = 0.004) lighting. The proportion also differed significantly between DICOM-calibrated consumer grade and 6-MP display in dentinal caries in lower molars in bright lighting (p = 0.039), tablet and consumer grade display in enamel caries in upper molars (p = 0.017) in bright lighting, tablet and 6-MP display in dentinal caries in lower molars (p = 0.003) in bright lighting and in enamel caries in lower molars (p = 0.012) in dim lighting.

CONCLUSIONS

DICOM calibration improves the detection of enamel and dentinal caries in bitewing radiographs, particularly in bright lighting. Therefore, a calibrated consumer grade display can be recommended as a diagnostic tool for viewing bitewing radiographs.