Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2017
Strut analysis for osteoporosis detection model using dental panoramic radiography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hwang Jae Joon, Lee Jeong-Hee, Han Sang-Sun, Kim Young Hyun, Jeong Ho-Gul, Choi Yoon Jeong, Park Wonse
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify variables that can be used for osteoporosis detection using strut analysis, fractal dimension (FD) and the gray level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) using multiple regions of interest and to develop an osteoporosis detection model based on panoramic radiography.
METHODS: A total of 454 panoramic radiographs from oral examinations in our dental hospital from 2012 to 2015 were randomly selected, equally distributed among osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic patients (n = 227 in each group). The radiographs were classified by bone mineral density (T-score). After 3 marrow regions and the endosteal margin area were selected, strut features, FD and GLCM were analysed using a customized image processing program. Image upsampling was used to obtain the optimal binarization for calculating strut features and FD. The independent-samples t-test was used to assess statistical differences between the 2 groups. A decision tree and support vector machine were used to create and verify an osteoporosis detection model.
RESULTS: The endosteal margin area showed statistically significant differences in FD, GLCM and strut variables between the osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic patients, whereas the medullary portions showed few distinguishing features. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the strut variables in the endosteal margin area were 97.1%, 95.7 and 96.25 using the decision tree and 97.2%, 97.1 and 96.9% using support vector machine, and these were the best results obtained among the 3 methods. Strut variables with FD and/or GLCM did not increase the diagnostic accuracy.
CONCLUSION: The analysis of strut features in the endosteal margin area showed potential for the development of an osteoporosis detection model based on panoramic radiography.
METHODS: A total of 454 panoramic radiographs from oral examinations in our dental hospital from 2012 to 2015 were randomly selected, equally distributed among osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic patients (n = 227 in each group). The radiographs were classified by bone mineral density (T-score). After 3 marrow regions and the endosteal margin area were selected, strut features, FD and GLCM were analysed using a customized image processing program. Image upsampling was used to obtain the optimal binarization for calculating strut features and FD. The independent-samples t-test was used to assess statistical differences between the 2 groups. A decision tree and support vector machine were used to create and verify an osteoporosis detection model.
RESULTS: The endosteal margin area showed statistically significant differences in FD, GLCM and strut variables between the osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic patients, whereas the medullary portions showed few distinguishing features. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the strut variables in the endosteal margin area were 97.1%, 95.7 and 96.25 using the decision tree and 97.2%, 97.1 and 96.9% using support vector machine, and these were the best results obtained among the 3 methods. Strut variables with FD and/or GLCM did not increase the diagnostic accuracy.
CONCLUSION: The analysis of strut features in the endosteal margin area showed potential for the development of an osteoporosis detection model based on panoramic radiography.