Effect of varying displays and room illuminance on caries diagnostic accuracy in digital dental radiographs

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.

Influence of radiographic acquisition methods and visualization software programs on the detection of misfits at the implant-abutment interface: An ex vivo study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Misfits at the implant-prosthesis interface may compromise implant-supported prostheses. Periapical radiographs are frequently used to detect misfit and can be obtained by using digital or film-based systems; however, which radiographic acquisition method and visualization software program provides the greatest accuracy is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this ex vivo study was to evaluate the influence of 3 radiographic acquisition methods (complementary metal oxide semiconductor [CMOS] sensor, phosphor plates, and radiographic films) and 2 visualization software programs (proprietary and third-party) on the detection of misfits at the implant-prosthesis interface.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-two dental implants were placed in dry human mandibles. Misfits were simulated by inserting a 50-μm polyester strip at the implant-prosthesis interface; prosthetic crowns installed directly over the implant platforms were considered as controls. Standard parallel periapical radiographs were obtained by using a CMOS sensor, a phosphor plate, and radiographic films. Five dentists assessed the digital radiographs for the presence or absence of misfits at the implant-prosthesis interface by using the proprietary software program and a third-party software program; film-based radiographs were evaluated on a light box. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (Az values) were compared (α=.05); sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values were also estimated.

RESULTS

All diagnostic and Az values were higher for the phosphor plate than for the CMOS sensor and the film-based methods (P<.05), regardless of the viewing software program used (proprietary or third-party) (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of phosphor plates positively influenced the diagnostic accuracy for the detection of misfits at the implant-prosthesis interface, irrespective of the viewing software program used.

Use of ambient lighting during colonoscopy and its effect on adenoma detection rate and eye fatigue: results of a pilot study

Background and study aims  Adenoma detection rate (ADR) appears to decrease as the number of consecutive hours performing procedures increases, and eye strain may be a contributing factor. Ambient light may improve symptoms of eye strain, but its effects have yet to be explored in the field of gastroenterology. We aim to determine if using ambient lighting during screening colonoscopy will maintain ADRs and improve eye strain symptoms compared with low lighting. Methods  At a single center, retrospective data were collected on colonoscopies performed under low lighting and compared to prospective data collected on colonoscopies with ambient lighting. Eye fatigue surveys were completed by gastroenterologists. Satisfaction surveys were completed by physicians and staff. Results  Of 498 low light and 611 ambient light cases, 172 and 220 adenomas were detected, respectively ( P  = 0.611). Under low lighting, the ADR decreased 5.6 % from first to last case of the day ( P  = 0.2658). With ambient lighting, the ADR increased by 2.80 % ( P  = 0.5445). The difference in the overall change in ADR between first and last cases with ambient light versus low light was statistically significant (8.40 % total unit change, P  = 0.01). The average eye strain scores were 8.12 with low light, and 5.63 with ambient light ( P  = 0.3341). Conclusions  Performing screening colonoscopies with ambient light may improve the differential change in ADR that occurs from the beginning to the end of the day. This improvement in ADR may be related to improvement in operator fatigue. The effect of ambient light on eye strain is unclear. Further investigation is warranted on the impact of ambient light on symptoms of eye strain and ADR.

Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries

BACKGROUND

The detection and diagnosis of caries at the earliest opportunity is fundamental to the preservation of tooth tissue and maintenance of oral health. Radiographs have traditionally been used to supplement the conventional visual-tactile clinical examination. Accurate, timely detection and diagnosis of early signs of disease could afford patients the opportunity of less invasive treatment with less destruction of tooth tissue, reduce the need for treatment with aerosol-generating procedures, and potentially result in a reduced cost of care to the patient and to healthcare services.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of different dental imaging methods to inform the detection and diagnosis of non-cavitated enamel only coronal dental caries.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist undertook a search of the following databases: MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 31 December 2018); Embase Ovid (1980 to 31 December 2018); US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov, to 31 December 2018); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 31 December 2018). We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy study designs that compared a dental imaging method with a reference standard (histology, excavation, enhanced visual examination), studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of single index tests, and studies that directly compared two or more index tests. Studies reporting at both the patient or tooth surface level were included. In vitro and in vivo studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies that explicitly recruited participants with more advanced lesions that were obviously into dentine or frankly cavitated were excluded. We also excluded studies that artificially created carious lesions and those that used an index test during the excavation of dental caries to ascertain the optimum depth of excavation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently and in duplicate using a standardised data extraction form and quality assessment based on QUADAS-2 specific to the clinical context. Estimates of diagnostic accuracy were determined using the bivariate hierarchical method to produce summary points of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence regions. Comparative accuracy of different radiograph methods was conducted based on indirect and direct comparisons between methods. Potential sources of heterogeneity were pre-specified and explored visually and more formally through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 104 datasets from 77 studies reporting a total of 15,518 tooth sites or surfaces. The most frequently reported imaging methods were analogue radiographs (55 datasets from 51 studies) and digital radiographs (42 datasets from 40 studies) followed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (7 datasets from 7 studies). Only 17 studies were of an in vivo study design, carried out in a clinical setting. No studies were considered to be at low risk of bias across all four domains but 16 studies were judged to have low concern for applicability across all domains. The patient selection domain had the largest number of studies judged to be at high risk of bias (43 studies); the index test, reference standard, and flow and timing domains were judged to be at high risk of bias in 30, 12, and 7 studies respectively. Studies were synthesised using a hierarchical bivariate method for meta-analysis. There was substantial variability in the results of the individual studies, with sensitivities that ranged from 0 to 0.96 and specificities from 0 to 1.00. For all imaging methods the estimated summary sensitivity and specificity point was 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.53) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.92), respectively. In a cohort of 1000 tooth surfaces with a prevalence of enamel caries of 63%, this would result in 337 tooth surfaces being classified as disease free when enamel caries was truly present (false negatives), and 43 tooth surfaces being classified as diseased in the absence of enamel caries (false positives). Meta-regression indicated that measures of accuracy differed according to the imaging method (Chi²(4) = 32.44, P < 0.001), with the highest sensitivity observed for CBCT, and the highest specificity observed for analogue radiographs. None of the specified potential sources of heterogeneity were able to explain the variability in results. No studies included restored teeth in their sample or reported the inclusion of sealants. We rated the certainty of the evidence as low for sensitivity and specificity and downgraded two levels in total for risk of bias due to limitations in the design and conduct of the included studies, indirectness arising from the in vitro studies, and the observed inconsistency of the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The design and conduct of studies to determine the diagnostic accuracy of methods to detect and diagnose caries in situ are particularly challenging. Low-certainty evidence suggests that imaging for the detection or diagnosis of early caries may have poor sensitivity but acceptable specificity, resulting in a relatively high number of false-negative results with the potential for early disease to progress. If left untreated, the opportunity to provide professional or self-care practices to arrest or reverse early caries lesions will be missed. The specificity of lesion detection is however relatively high, and one could argue that initiation of non-invasive management (such as the use of topical fluoride), is probably of low risk. CBCT showed superior sensitivity to analogue or digital radiographs but has very limited applicability to the general dental practitioner. However, given the high-radiation dose, and potential for caries-like artefacts from existing restorations, its use cannot be justified in routine caries detection. Nonetheless, if early incidental carious lesions are detected in CBCT scans taken for other purposes, these should be reported. CBCT has the potential to be used as a reference standard in diagnostic studies of this type. Despite the robust methodology applied in this comprehensive review, the results should be interpreted with some caution due to shortcomings in the design and execution of many of the included studies. Future research should evaluate the comparative accuracy of different methods, be undertaken in a clinical setting, and focus on minimising bias arising from the use of imperfect reference standards in clinical studies.

Impact of viewing conditions on the performance assessment of different computer monitors used for dental diagnostics

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the computer monitors used for analysis and interpretation of digital radiographs within the clinics of the Oral Health Centre of Western Australia.

Materials and Methods

In total, 135 computer monitors (3 brands, 6 models) were assessed by analysing the same radiographic image of a combined 13-step aluminium step wedge and the Artinis CDDent 1.0® (Artinis Medical Systems B.V.®, Elst, the Netherlands) test object. The number of steps and cylindrical objects observed on each monitor was recorded along with the monitor's make, model, position relative to the researcher's eye level, and proximity to the nearest window. The number of window panels blocked by blinds, the outside weather conditions, and the number of ceiling lights over the surgical suite/cubicle were also recorded. MedCalc® version 19.2.1 (MedCalc Software Ltd®, Ostend, Belgium, https://www.medcalc.org; 2020) was used for statistical analyses (Kruskal-Wallis test and stepwise regression analysis). The level of significance was set at P<0.05.

Results

Stepwise regression analysis showed that only the monitor brand and proximity of the monitor to a window had a significant impact on the monitor's performance (P<0.05). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences (P<0.05) in monitor performance for all variables investigated, except for the weather and the clinic in which the monitors were placed.

Conclusion

The vast performance variation present between computer monitors implies the need for a review of monitor selection, calibration, and viewing conditions.

Is the digital radiographic detection of approximal caries lesions influenced by viewing conditions?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of different viewing conditions (combinations of computer display, horizontal viewing angle, and ambient lighting) on the detection of approximal caries lesions on digital radiographic images.

STUDY DESIGN

Forty posterior teeth were mounted in a plaster block and radiographed by using a CMOS sensor-based system. Three oral radiologists assessed the radiographic images under different conditions of computer display (iMac 5K 27", Barco MDRC-2124, and Dell P2314H), horizontal viewing angles (90 degrees, 67.5 degrees, and 45 degrees), and ambient lighting (low, medium, and high) and were asked to detect the presence of approximal caries lesions, which were confirmed by means of micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), using a 5-point scale. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated and compared by analysis of variance testing (α = 0.05). Intra- and interobserver agreements were assessed with the Kappa test.

RESULTS

Computer display, horizontal viewing angle, and ambient lighting did not significantly influence the diagnosis of approximal caries lesions. In general, moderate values of accuracy, low sensitivity, and high specificity were found for all viewing conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The viewing conditions assessed in this study did not influence the detection of approximal caries lesions on digital radiographic images. Dental practitioners are encouraged to find their most comfortable viewing condition for this diagnostic task.

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.

Low reproducibility between oral radiologists and general dentists with regards to radiographic diagnosis of caries

AIM

Early clinical and radiological diagnosis of dental caries is one of the fundamental objectives of clinical dentistry because of the high frequency of the disease and severe complications if caries remains untreated, especially among the elderly and patients with immunodeficiency. Dental panoramic tomography (DPT) is a common radiographic method for evaluating dentition when indicated, especially in an adult population. The aim of this study was to assess the reproducibility of diagnosis between specialists in oral radiology and general dentists with regards to caries lesions based on DPTs of adults.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One-hundred DPTs taken from adult patients (average age 35) and then analyzed and reported on by 42 general dentists were then analyzed independently by two specialists in oral radiology with respect to caries lesions in the premolar and molar areas using radiographic criteria established for caries diagnosis. The general dentists versus oral radiologists were not calibrated before. Level of agreement between specialists and general dentists was measured using Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

Comparison between observations of general dentists and specialists in oral radiology showed that 61% of the caries lesions on proximal surfaces of premolars and molars observed by specialists went unobserved by general dentists. Cohen's kappa value for specialists was 0.85 (p < .001) and for each specialist and general dentists 0.48 (p < .001) and 0.44 (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The reproducibility between specialists in oral radiology and general dentists for detecting caries in DPTs was low.

Influence of brightness and contrast adjustments on the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions

OBJECTIVES

To assess the influence of brightness and contrast adjustments of digital radiographs on the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions, and to compare with observers' preferences for subjective image quality.

METHODS

80 proximal surfaces of posterior teeth were radiographed using an intraoral digital system (Digora Toto, Soredex, Finland). Initial images and four different combinations of brightness and contrast for each radiography were analysed. Five observers scored the images for the presence and extension of caries lesions. Micro-CT images were used as gold standard. In a second stage, the observers were asked which of the radiographs they preferred for the assessment of caries lesions.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the original and adjusted radiographic images regarding the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference between the micro-CT and the intraoral radiographs (p < 0.0001). Images with high brightness and low contrast presented higher number of true negative cases, but also a decrease in caries detection. On the other hand, there were more cases of overestimation of the presence and extension of caries lesions in images with low brightness and high contrast. The subjective evaluation of image quality showed that radiographs with lower brightness and higher contrast tended to be preferred by observers.

CONCLUSIONS

Brightness and contrast adjustments in digital intraoral radiographs within the range tested in this study do not significantly influence the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions, although observers tend to prefer lower brightness and higher contrast images.

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.

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

OBJECTIVES

To compare observer performance in the detection of anatomical structures and pathology in panoramic radiographs using consumer grade with and without digital imaging and communication in medicine (DICOM)-calibration and 6-megapixel (6-MP) displays under different lighting conditions.

METHODS

30 panoramic radiographs were randomly evaluated on three displays under bright (510 lx) and dim (16 lx) ambient lighting by two observers with different years of experience. Dentinoenamel junction, dentinal caries and periapical inflammatory lesions, visibility of cortical border of the floor and pathological lesions in maxillary sinus were evaluated. Consensus between the observers was considered as reference. Intraobserver agreement was determined. Proportion of equivalent ratings and weighted kappa were used to assess reliability. The level of significance was set to p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The proportion of equivalent ratings with consensus differed between uncalibrated and DICOM-calibrated consumer grade displays in dentinal caries in the lower molar in dim lighting (p = 0.021) and between DICOM-calibrated consumer grade and 6-MP display in bright lighting (p = 0.038) for an experienced observer. Significant differences were found between uncalibrated and DICOM-calibrated consumer grade displays in dentinal caries in bright lighting (p = 0.044) and periapical lesions in the upper molar in dim lighting (p = 0.008) for a less experienced observer. Intraobserver reliability was better at detecting dentinal caries than at detecting periapical and maxillary sinus pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

DICOM calibration may improve observer performance in panoramic radiography in different lighting conditions. Therefore, a DICOM-calibrated consumer grade display can be used instead of a medical display in dental practice without compromising the diagnostic quality.

Carious lesions: diagnostic accuracy using pre-calibrated monitor in various ambient light levels: an in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effect of different monitor calibration modes under various ambient lighting conditions on the ability of observers to recognize proximal carious lesions of varying depths.

METHODS

7 observers evaluated 100 teeth for proximal carious lesions on standardized digital radiographs using 3 set-ups: (1) pre-calibrated monitor for high ambient light (higher than 1000 lux), (2) pre-calibrated monitor for low ambient light (less than 50 lux) and (3) Barten calibration (Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine) on the monitor in dimmed ambient light (less than 50 lux). Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted for all observations. The criterion standard was histological examination of the teeth. The effects of three conditions were compared using a paired t-test. The level of significance was set to p < 0.05.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in diagnostic accuracy for the detection of any type of proximal carious lesions between the different calibration modes of the monitor according to different ambient light levels.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that any difference between ambient light levels affects the ability to detect carious lesions in digital radiographs as long as the monitor was calibrated in accordance with the surrounding light level.