Radiation exposure with the RVG-S and conventional intraoral X-ray film

Oral Radiology (Impact Factor: 0.46). 05/1994; 10(1):33-40. DOI: 10.1007/BF02348012


The exposure required to obtain optimal image quality was determined using conventional intraoral x-ray film (Eastman Kodak,
Rochester, NY) and the RVG-S Radio VisioGraphy-S: Trophy Radiology, Vincennes, France) CCD-based intraoral radiographic imaging
system. The RVG-S permitted dose reductions of 50 to 65% for individual exposures in comparison with Ektaspeed film, and 73
to 76% when compared to Ultraspeed film. The dose dynamic for the RVG-S was 8.6 times narrower than that for conventional
film. Perception of low contrast details was not significantly different between either type of x-ray film and the RVG-S.

1 Follower
276 Reads
  • Source
    • "Therefore, amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography systems could be a cost-effective replacement for conventional radiography systems in the future (Bacher et al., 2003). Another study showed that RVG-S permitted a dose reduction of 50-65% when compared to Ektaspeed film and of 73-76% when compared to Ultraspeed film for individual exposures (Wakoh et al., 1994). In the study of patient in charge-coupled device based full-mouth intraoral radiography. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: The manipulation of radiographic images is possible in digital radiograph, thus the exposure time can be reduced nevertheless the processing time is shorter if compared to conventional radiography. Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the image clarity between conventional and digital intraoral radiograph. Methods: Digital and conventional radiographs were captured the image of an extracted maxillary incisor with constant set-ting of the x-ray source at 70 kVp and 5mAs. Then three series of the digital radiographic of the same specimen was captured at 66 kVp, 63 kVp, 60 kVp. Images were presented to 46 fourth year dental students to evaluate the image quality considering the clarity of tooth pattern. The percentage of observers determined which images were superior or same among digital or conven-tional were recorded. Results: Digital setting at 66 kVp images were rated as the most superior among all the 4 settings by 67.4% of observers fol-lowed by 65.2% for voltage setting 70 kVp, 63.0% for voltage setting 63 kVp and 56.5% for voltage setting 60 kVp. Although the percentage of choosing the most superior image started to be decreased in digital setting in 70 kVp and after 66 kVp howev-er, it was still better than conventional method. Conclusion: Digital radiographic image taking on extracted tooth specimen with the setting of 66 kVp was the most superior among other setting. Conventional radiography showed inferior to digital image at any setting. This study suggested that the image of digital radiography was superior to conventional radiographic.
    International Medical Journal (1994) 06/2013; 20(3):329-331. · 0.09 Impact Factor
  • Source

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ObjectivesThis study investigated the effect of the size of the sensitive area of the charge-coupled devices (CCD) used in digital intraoral radiographic systems on the patient effective dose in full-mouth radiographic examinations. MethodsThe effective dose was assessed in full-mouth radiographic examinations using the bisecting angle technique, while assuming that CCD sensitivity is equivalent to that of E-speed film. The results were compared with the effective doses obtained using E-speed film. The tube potentials used were 70, 80, and 90 kV. The diameter of the circular field at the cone tip was 7 cm, and the length of the spacer cone was 20 cm. Twelve types of CCD devices with sensitive areas ranging from 307 to 1200 mm2 were assessed in seven digital intraoral radiographic systems. ResultsThe number of exposures and effective dose using the CCD devices were inversely proportional to the sensitive area of the CCD. Both the number of exposures and the effective dose were increased when using a CCD with a sensitive area smaller than the intraoral film size. Consequently, a reduction in the patient dose did not occur to the extent expected, based on the relative sensitivity of the CCD to film. ConclusionsIn order to fully realize the advantages of a CCD, it will be necessary both to reduce the frequency of examinations and to use a rectangular-shaped beam in CCD-based intraoral radiographic systems.
    Oral Radiology 12/2006; 22(2):62-68. DOI:10.1007/s11282-006-0049-4 · 0.46 Impact Factor
Show more