18.02.2013 Views

Program including abstracts as pdf available here

Program including abstracts as pdf available here

Program including abstracts as pdf available here

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

P 40<br />

Title<br />

EFFECT OF IMAGE PROCESSING ON PROXIMAL CARIES DETECTION AT DIFFERENT<br />

EXPOSuRES<br />

Authors<br />

E. ONEM 1 , E. SOGuR 1 , b.G. bAKSI 1 , A. MERT 2<br />

Affiliations<br />

1 Ege University, School of Dentistry, Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, Izmir, TUR-<br />

KEY, 2 Ege University, Faculty of Science, Department of Statistics, Izmir, TURKEY<br />

Body<br />

Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of proximal enamel demineralization before and<br />

after the application of processing algorithms at two exposures.<br />

Methods: Forty-five extracted sound premolars were imaged prior to any acid application and<br />

the images were used <strong>as</strong> controls. Standard enamel windows were exposed to a demineralizing<br />

solution for 80 hrs. Teeth were radiographed with storage phosphor plate system for 0.08 s<br />

and 0.12 s. Original images (O) were enhanced using sharpen (S) and exp 2 (E) filters. Five<br />

observers scored the presence/absence of proximal demineralization. The diagnostic accuracy<br />

w<strong>as</strong> expressed <strong>as</strong> the area under the ROC curve (Az). Azs were compared with two-way ANOVA.<br />

Post-hoc t-test w<strong>as</strong> used for pair-wise comparisons (p=0.05). Interobserver agreement w<strong>as</strong><br />

me<strong>as</strong>ured with Kappa.<br />

Results: The mean Azs for 0.08s were 0.95, 0.99 and 0.87 for O, S, and E respectively. Corresponding<br />

Azs for 0.12s were 0.95, 0.98 and 0.88. Sensitivity of S (0.98) w<strong>as</strong> higher than O<br />

(0.84) while specificities were comparable at both exposures. Sensitivity and specificity of E<br />

w<strong>as</strong> lower than O and S for both exposures. Azs for 0.08s and 0.12s were not different for any<br />

of the image types (p>0.05). S and O showed higher accuracy than E for the detection of proximal<br />

demineralization for both exposures (p0.05). Agreement ranged between moderate and substantial.<br />

Conclusions: Original and sharpened images showed comparable performance, but change in<br />

exposure did not affect the detection accuracy of subsurface enamel demineralization.<br />

Keywords<br />

Radiography, Dental, Digital,Dental Caries/diagnosis,Image Enhancement<br />

POSTerS<br />

155

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!