Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology

T. M. Lehmann, H. G. Gröndahl, Douglas Benn

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: (1) To review computerized a posteriori techniques for geometry and contrast registration prior to digital subtraction in dental radiography; (2) to define a uniform notation for their methodological and technical classification and based on this key code; (3) to derive criteria for successful application of computer-based a posteriori registration for routine clinical subtraction. Methods: All techniques are classified with respect to the (1) dimension of geometry registration; (2) origin; (3) abstraction level, and (4) linkage of features used for registration of geometry; (5) elasticity; (6) domain, and (7) parameter determination of the geometrical transform used; (8) interaction of geometrical registration; as well as (9) origin of features, (10) model of transform, and (11) interaction of procedure for contrast correction. Results: With respect to clinical practicability, superior registration techniques are based on the low level abstraction of intrinsic features for both geometry and contrast registration. By approximately linking the features, a global projective transform should be generated for geometry registration by automatic methods, while automatic contrast correction should be non-parametric. This challenge is met only by one out of 36 published algorithms. Hence, although numerous computer-based techniques have been published, only a few of them are applied more than once in practice. Conclusion: The key code proposed in this paper is useful for technical classification of a posteriori registration methods in dental radiography and allows their objective comparison. Further investigations will focus on standardization of practicable procedures to evaluate the robustness of competing methods.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)323-346
Number of pages24
JournalDentomaxillofacial Radiology
Volume29
Issue number6
StatePublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Radiology
Tooth
Dental Radiography
Elasticity

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Dentistry(all)
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology. / Lehmann, T. M.; Gröndahl, H. G.; Benn, Douglas.

In: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2000, p. 323-346.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Lehmann, T. M. ; Gröndahl, H. G. ; Benn, Douglas. / Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology. In: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2000 ; Vol. 29, No. 6. pp. 323-346.
@article{1c5661605fdb4087bced4e082715241a,
title = "Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology",
abstract = "Objectives: (1) To review computerized a posteriori techniques for geometry and contrast registration prior to digital subtraction in dental radiography; (2) to define a uniform notation for their methodological and technical classification and based on this key code; (3) to derive criteria for successful application of computer-based a posteriori registration for routine clinical subtraction. Methods: All techniques are classified with respect to the (1) dimension of geometry registration; (2) origin; (3) abstraction level, and (4) linkage of features used for registration of geometry; (5) elasticity; (6) domain, and (7) parameter determination of the geometrical transform used; (8) interaction of geometrical registration; as well as (9) origin of features, (10) model of transform, and (11) interaction of procedure for contrast correction. Results: With respect to clinical practicability, superior registration techniques are based on the low level abstraction of intrinsic features for both geometry and contrast registration. By approximately linking the features, a global projective transform should be generated for geometry registration by automatic methods, while automatic contrast correction should be non-parametric. This challenge is met only by one out of 36 published algorithms. Hence, although numerous computer-based techniques have been published, only a few of them are applied more than once in practice. Conclusion: The key code proposed in this paper is useful for technical classification of a posteriori registration methods in dental radiography and allows their objective comparison. Further investigations will focus on standardization of practicable procedures to evaluate the robustness of competing methods.",
author = "Lehmann, {T. M.} and Gr{\"o}ndahl, {H. G.} and Douglas Benn",
year = "2000",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "323--346",
journal = "Dentomaxillofacial Radiology",
issn = "0250-832X",
publisher = "British Institute of Radiology",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Computer-based registration for digital subtraction in dental radiology

AU - Lehmann, T. M.

AU - Gröndahl, H. G.

AU - Benn, Douglas

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Objectives: (1) To review computerized a posteriori techniques for geometry and contrast registration prior to digital subtraction in dental radiography; (2) to define a uniform notation for their methodological and technical classification and based on this key code; (3) to derive criteria for successful application of computer-based a posteriori registration for routine clinical subtraction. Methods: All techniques are classified with respect to the (1) dimension of geometry registration; (2) origin; (3) abstraction level, and (4) linkage of features used for registration of geometry; (5) elasticity; (6) domain, and (7) parameter determination of the geometrical transform used; (8) interaction of geometrical registration; as well as (9) origin of features, (10) model of transform, and (11) interaction of procedure for contrast correction. Results: With respect to clinical practicability, superior registration techniques are based on the low level abstraction of intrinsic features for both geometry and contrast registration. By approximately linking the features, a global projective transform should be generated for geometry registration by automatic methods, while automatic contrast correction should be non-parametric. This challenge is met only by one out of 36 published algorithms. Hence, although numerous computer-based techniques have been published, only a few of them are applied more than once in practice. Conclusion: The key code proposed in this paper is useful for technical classification of a posteriori registration methods in dental radiography and allows their objective comparison. Further investigations will focus on standardization of practicable procedures to evaluate the robustness of competing methods.

AB - Objectives: (1) To review computerized a posteriori techniques for geometry and contrast registration prior to digital subtraction in dental radiography; (2) to define a uniform notation for their methodological and technical classification and based on this key code; (3) to derive criteria for successful application of computer-based a posteriori registration for routine clinical subtraction. Methods: All techniques are classified with respect to the (1) dimension of geometry registration; (2) origin; (3) abstraction level, and (4) linkage of features used for registration of geometry; (5) elasticity; (6) domain, and (7) parameter determination of the geometrical transform used; (8) interaction of geometrical registration; as well as (9) origin of features, (10) model of transform, and (11) interaction of procedure for contrast correction. Results: With respect to clinical practicability, superior registration techniques are based on the low level abstraction of intrinsic features for both geometry and contrast registration. By approximately linking the features, a global projective transform should be generated for geometry registration by automatic methods, while automatic contrast correction should be non-parametric. This challenge is met only by one out of 36 published algorithms. Hence, although numerous computer-based techniques have been published, only a few of them are applied more than once in practice. Conclusion: The key code proposed in this paper is useful for technical classification of a posteriori registration methods in dental radiography and allows their objective comparison. Further investigations will focus on standardization of practicable procedures to evaluate the robustness of competing methods.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034327590&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034327590&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

C2 - 11114663

AN - SCOPUS:0034327590

VL - 29

SP - 323

EP - 346

JO - Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

JF - Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

SN - 0250-832X

IS - 6

ER -