Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 17, 2025
Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
Correlation between spatial resolution and ball distortion rate of panoramic radiography
Han-Gyeol Yeom1,2, Jo-Eun Kim1, Kyung-Hoe Huh1
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, South Korea.
Background:
The purpose of this study was to analyze the correlation between spatial resolution and ball distortion rate of panoramic radiography and to elucidate the minimum criterion for ball distortion rate, which is very relevant to clinical readability.
Methods:
Horizontal and vertical spatial resolution and ball distortion rates were calculated in the same position, such as the incisor, premolar, molar, and temporomandibular joint area with various object depths corresponding to 48 mm. Three devices were evaluated. A region showing spatial resolution above the reference standard was selected, and the ball distortion rate corresponding to the same region was divided into horizontal and vertical phantom groups. The mean and standard deviation of the obtained ball distortion rates were calculated. Student's t-test was used to statistically analyze the mean difference in ball distortion rates between vertical and horizontal phantom groups.
Results:
In all devices, the horizontal line pair phantom, but not the vertical line pair phantom, was readable in all areas measured at the line pair value of at least 1.88 lp/mm. The line pair value tended to be higher toward the center and lower toward the outside. The ball distortion rate tended to decrease closer to the center and increased further away. In addition, ball distortion rates could not be measured at some areas as they were not recognized as balls due to the high degree of distortion at the outermost and innermost sides. The number of balls satisfying the reference value using the horizontal line pair phantom was 102 (mean of ball distortion rates, 20.98; standard deviation, 15.25). The number of balls satisfying the reference value using the vertical line pair phantom was 49 (mean of ball distortion rates, 16.33; standard deviation, 14.25). However, mean ball distortion rate was not significantly different between the two groups.
Conclusions:
Image layer of panoramic radiography could be evaluated by the spatial resolution using horizontal and vertical line pair phantoms and by assessing ball distortion rates through a ball-type panorama phantom. A ball distortion rate of 20% could be used as a threshold to evaluate the image layer of panoramic radiography.
