Advertisement

Response to the article “Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment”

Published:August 27, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2016.07.029
      To the Editor:
      This letter is in response to an article titled “Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment” published online May 5, 2016.
      • Hellén-Halme K.
      • Johansson C.
      • Nilsson M.
      Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment.
      We are pleased to see the publication of research stressing the need for more objective assessments for quality assurance with digital intraoral systems. Other researchers, Mol and Yoon, have similarly stressed the need for the use of objective assessment of digital intraoral systems, in the publication “Guide to digital radiographic imaging.”
      • Mol A.
      • Yoon D.
      Guide to Digital Radiographic Imaging.
      We too have conducted research in this area, and, as such, we wish to correct a statement made by the authors.
      In the paper, the authors state, “… no studies comparing sensors of different models, using objective quantification of key image quality parameters, could be found in the literature.”
      • Hellén-Halme K.
      • Johansson C.
      • Nilsson M.
      Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment.
      In fact, objective assessment of imaging parameters with digital intraoral systems has been previously presented by our team as well as at other academic and commercial research institutions.
      Our team published a paper titled “Quality assurance phantom for digital dental imaging,”
      • Mah P.
      • McDavid W.D.
      • Dove S.B.
      Quality assurance phantom for digital dental imaging.
      presenting a method whereby objective assessment of physical imaging parameters is done to determine the optimal exposure of a digital imaging system and to ensure longitudinal quality assurance on a periodic basis.
      Another paper by Verdú et al., titled “Specific developed phantoms and software to assess radiological equipment image quality,”

      Verdú G, Mayo P, Rodenas F, Campayo JM. Specific developed phantoms and software to assess radiological equipment image quality. International Nuclear Atlantic Conference, INAC 2011, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.

      presents an alternative objective method to assess imaging parameters with digital imaging systems.
      A third paper, “Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral radiographic systems” by Udupa et al.,
      • Udupa H.
      • Mah P.
      • McDavid W.D.
      • Dove S.B.
      Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems.
      presents an evaluation of 20 different intraoral digital systems using an objective assessment of the physical parameters. The following is found on page 777 of that paper, where the authors clearly state: “Spatial resolution (SR) and contrast/detail detectability (C/D) were measured for all images using image analysis software where applicable (UTHSCSA ImageTool; University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA).”
      • Udupa H.
      • Mah P.
      • McDavid W.D.
      • Dove S.B.
      Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems.
      Finally, another paper, “Digital intraoral radiographic quality assurance and control in private practice,” used an objective assessment of the “high contrast resolution as defined by the number of visible line pairs/mm . . . measured utilizing the ImageJ software.”
      • Walker T.F.
      • Mah P.
      • McDavid W.D.
      • Dove S.B.
      Digital intraoral radiographic quality assurance and control in private practice.
      There are at least two products available commercially to perform objective assessment of physical parameters of digital intraoral radiographic systems for quality assurance evaluation. One such product is the Digital Dental Quality Assurance Phantom (http://www.dentalimagingconsultants.com/Products.aspx). Another is the CD DENT Phantom (http://www.southernscientific.co.uk/catalog/products/cd-dent-phantom?category-id=312).
      From the above-cited references, it is clear that the authors are incorrect in their statement.
      Respectfully,

      References

        • Hellén-Halme K.
        • Johansson C.
        • Nilsson M.
        Comparison of the performance of intraoral X-ray sensors using objective image quality assessment.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016; 121: e129-e137
        • Mol A.
        • Yoon D.
        Guide to Digital Radiographic Imaging.
        CDA J. 2015; 43: 503-511
        • Mah P.
        • McDavid W.D.
        • Dove S.B.
        Quality assurance phantom for digital dental imaging.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011; 112: 632-639
      1. Verdú G, Mayo P, Rodenas F, Campayo JM. Specific developed phantoms and software to assess radiological equipment image quality. International Nuclear Atlantic Conference, INAC 2011, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.

        • Udupa H.
        • Mah P.
        • McDavid W.D.
        • Dove S.B.
        Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2013; 117: 774-783
        • Walker T.F.
        • Mah P.
        • McDavid W.D.
        • Dove S.B.
        Digital intraoral radiographic quality assurance and control in private practice.
        Gen Dent. 2014; 62: 22-29

      Linked Article