The validity of different display monitors in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions in cone beam computed tomography images

References

• Veyre-Goulet S, Fortin T, Thierry A. Accuracy of linear measurement provided by cone beam computed tomography to assess bone quantity in the posterior maxilla: a human cadaver study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008;10:226–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:10–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:228–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naitoh M, Katsumata A, Mitsuya S, Kamemoto H, Ariji E. Measurement of mandibles with microfocus X-ray computerized tomography and compact computerized tomography for dental use. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:239–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Ekrish A, Ekram M. A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40:67–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naitoh M, Nakahara K, Suenaga Y, Gotoh K, Kondo S, Ariji E. Comparison between cone-beam and multislice computed tomography depicting mandibular neurovascular canal structures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;109:e25–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fatemitabar S, Nikgoo A. Multichannel computed tomography versus cone-beam computed tomography: linear accuracy of in vitro measurements of the maxilla for implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:499–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM Jr, Boone JM. The essential physics of medical imaging. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Kimpe T, Tuytschaever T. Increasing the number of gray shades in medical display systems—how much is enough? J Digit Imaging 2007;20:422–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Royal College of Radiologists. Picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) and guidelines on diagnostic display devices. London: The Royal College of Radiologists; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Haak R, Wicht M, Hellmich M, Nowak G, Noack M. Influence of room lighting on grey-scale perception with a CRT- and a TFT monitor display. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002;31:193–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacher K, Smeets P, De Hauwere A, Voet T, Duyck P, Verstraete K, et al. Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection. Eur J Radiol 2006;58:471–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatanaka S, Morishita J, Hiwasa T, Dogomori K, Toyofuku F, Ohki M, et al. Comparison of viewing angle and observer performances in different types of liquid-crystal display monitors. Radiol Phys Technol 2009;2:166–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ilgüy M, Dinçer S, Ilgüy D, Bayirli G. Detection of artificial occlusal caries in a phosphor imaging plate system with two types of LCD monitors versus three different films. J Digit Imaging 2009;22:242–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutcher M, Kalathingal S, Ludlow J, Abreu M, Platin E. The effect of lighting conditions on caries interpretation with a laptop computer in a clinical setting. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;102:537–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellen-Halme K, Petersson A, Warfvinge G, Nilsson M. Effect of ambient light and monitor brightness and contrast settings on the detection of approximal caries in digital radiographs: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:380–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isidor S, Faaborg-Andersen M, Hintze H, Kirkevang L-L, Frydenberg M, Haiter-Neto F, et al. Effect of monitor display on detection of approximal caries lesions in digital radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009;38:537–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang X, Jacobs R, Hassan B, Li L, Pauwels R, Corpas L, et al. A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT) Part I. On subjective image quality. European J Radiol 2010;75:265–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs T, Kalender W. On the correlation of pixel noise, spatial resolution and dose in computed tomography: theoretical prediction and verification by simulation and measurement. Phys Med 2003;19:153–64.
   Google Scholar