Does 3D Emboss Image Processing Filter Improves Detecting Proximal Recurrent Caries in Digital Bitewing Radiograph?

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
A. Pourahmadiyeh 1
A. Habibikia 2
S. Bahmani 3
A. Dabaghi 2
1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
3 Dental Student, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
Abstract
Background: Most digital imaging systems provide a variety of image processing techniques. The aim of the present study was to compare the performance of bite wing digital radiography with and without the application of 3D emboss image processing filters in identifying recurrent proximal caries. Materials and methods: In the current study, cavities were created in both proximal surfaces of 52 healthy premolar teeth for Class II amalgam restoration. Caries lesions were artificially created by a 0.5 mm trend burr randomly in each tooth and repaired with amalgam. Standard digital radiographs were performed using the Digora® Optime system. Unfiltered and filtered images with 3D emboss filter were observed by 2 radiologists with at least 2 years of work experience and the final results were analyzed with Chi-square statistics. Results: The obtained results demonstrated that the sensitivity and specificity of caries detection changes with the change in the observer, although no significant difference was observed between the sensitivity and specificity of the third and fourth observers. In addition, the results of this research showed that the sensitivity, accuracy and specificity of detecting recurrent secondary caries in radiographs without using the 3D emboss filter for all observers participating in this project was more significant than the sensitivity, accuracy and specificity of radiographs with 3D emboss filter. Conclusion: The obtained data documents that use of the 3D emboss filter failed to improve the diagnosis of recurrent secondary caries through reduces the sensitivity, accuracy and specificity of diagnosis.

Keywords

Subjects

1. Mjör IA. Clinical diagnosis of recurrent caries. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2005 Oct 1;136(10):1426-33.
2. Schwendicke F, Meyer-Lueckel H, Dörfer C, Paris S. Attitudes and behaviour regarding deep dentin caries removal: a survey among German dentists. Caries research. 2013 Nov 1;47(6):566-73.
3. Farooq S. Diagnosis of Dental Caries-Old and the New. OrangeBooks Publication; 2022 Apr 12.
4. Schwendicke F, Tzschoppe M, Paris S. Radiographic caries detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of dentistry. 2015 Aug 1;43(8):924-33.
5. Taghiloo H, Taghiloo S, Rahbar M, Safabakhsh D. Comparison of the accuracy of digital radiography with conventional radiography and visual examination in the detection of permanent teeth interproximal caries. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2019 Sep 2;19:e4387.
6. Singh K. Image Receptors in Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Orangebooks Publication; 2020 Jul 8.
7. Vasconcelos I, Franco M, Pereira M, Duarte I, Ginjeira A, Alves N. 3D-printed multisampling holder for microcomputed tomography applied to life and materials science research. Micron. 2021 Nov 1;150:103142.
8. Di Angelo L, Di Stefano P, Guardiani E. A review of computer-based methods for classification and reconstruction of 3D high-density scanned archaeological pottery. Journal of Cultural Heritage. 2022 Jul 1;56:10-24.
9. Arroyo-Bote S, Herrero-Tarilonte S, Mas-Ramis J, Bennasar-Verger C. Dentist´ s attitude and criteria in the diagnosis and treatment of caries lesions: Survey about a clinical case. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry. 2022 Jan;14(1):e16.
10. Kumar A, Bhadauria HS, Singh A. Descriptive analysis of dental X-ray images using various practical methods: A review. PeerJ Computer Science. 2021 Sep 13;7:e620.
11. Rondon RH, Pereira YC, do Nascimento GC. Common positioning errors in panoramic radiography: A review. Imaging science in dentistry. 2014 Mar 1;44(1):1-6.
12. Sahu RK, Rajguru JP, Pattnaiak N, Bardhan D, Nayak B. Assessment of diagnostic accuracy of a direct digital radiographic-CMOS image with four types of filtered images for the detection of occlusal caries. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2020 Jan 1;9(1):206-14.
13. Dobrzański LA, Dobrzański LB, Dobrzańska-Danikiewicz AD, Dobrzańska J. The concept of sustainable development of modern dentistry. Processes. 2020 Dec 6;8(12):1605.
14. Paymani A, Talayeepour A, Nemati Anaraki S, Mehralizadeh S, SHirzad Delavar A, Talebi S. Evaluation of the accuracy of digital subtraction radiography in the diagnosis of different depths of Class III Caries (An Invitro Study). Res Dent Sci. 2011 Nov 10;8(3):120-9.
15. Satpathy A, Ranjan R, Priyadarsini S, Gupta S, Mathur P, Mishra M. Diagnostic imaging techniques in oral diseases. Medical Imaging Methods: Recent Trends. 2019:59-95.
16. Galani M, Tewari S, Sangwan P, Mittal S, Kumar V, Duhan J. Comparative evaluation of postoperative pain and success rate after pulpotomy and root canal treatment in cariously exposed mature permanent molars: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Endodontics. 2017 Dec 1;43(12):1953-62.
17. Talaeipour A, Hafezi L, Niktash A, Amir arjmandi H. Proximal Dental Enamel Caries Diagnosis in Digital Radiography with and without Sharpening Enhancement Filter (In vitro). J Res Dent Sci 2015; 11 (4) :221-226.
18. Şenel B, Kamburoğlu K, Üçok Ö, Yüksel SP, Özen T, Avsever H. Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities in detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2010 Dec 1;39(8):501-11.
19. Dias da Silva PR, Martins Marques M, Steagall Jr W, Medeiros Mendes F, Lascala CA. Accuracy of direct digital radiography for detecting occlusal caries in primary teeth compared with conventional radiography and visual inspection: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2010 Sep 1;39(6):362-7.
20. Tafakhori Z, Khazaei M, Afshari Poor A. Accuracy of digital panoramic imaging in detection of proximal caries in posterior teeth. Sadra Medical Journal. 2016 Mar 20;4(2):99-106.
21. Hekmatian E, Esfandabadi SV. Assessment of the ability of senior dental students of Esfahan University of Medical Sciences to detect interproximal caries on conventional bite-wing radiographs in 2012‒2013 educational year. مجله دانشکده دندانپزشکی اصفهان. 2013 Jul 22:266-72.
22. Tavakoli E, Davari A, Javadi ZS, GHAFFARI TM. Ability of dental students in detection of proximal caries. Journal of Dental School-Shahid Beheshti Medical Sciences University. 2015; 33 (3): 220-224.
23. da Silveira Tiecher PF, Assein Arús N, Adams Hilgert E, Dias da Silveira HE, Pante Fontana M, Dias da Silveira HL, Vizzotto MB. Exploring digital filters for internal root resorption: how can we improve the diagnosis of small lesions?. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2022 May 1;51(4):20210314.
24. de Azevedo Vaz, S.L., Vasconcelos, T.V., Neves, F.S., de Freitas, D.Q., Haiter-Neto, F., Influence of Cone-Beam computed tomography enhancement filters on diagnosis of simulated external root resorption. J. Endod. 2012;38(3):305-308.
25. Dabbaghi A, Abbassi S, Shams N, Niroomand N, Habibi Kia A. Efficacy of image processing filters in the detection of proximal caries in digital bitewing radiograph. Jundishapur Scientific Medical Journal. 2015 May 22;14(2):170-80.
Pathobiology Reserach
Volume 26, Issue 4
July 2023
Pages 59-68