Aims and objectives
To display the entire dentation,
panoramic dental imaging or intraoral full mouth series can be used [1-3].
According to the literature [1] the effective dose for panoramic imaging is one fifth of the value for full mouth series.
Based on the data from the literature seven different combinations for the full mouth series were determined (15,
20 or 21 images with the possibility of 2 or 4 bite wings projections) [1-3].
The aim of the study was to determine the difference in DAP,
between panoramic...
Methods and materials
The study was performed in two parts.
In the first part the measurements were done on an intraoral dental x-ray unit.
The dose area product (DAP) was measured using an external DAP meter that was placed directly under the position indicating device (PID).
Measurements were performed according to exposure parameters that are used daily in the clinical environment for each separate image.
The exposure parameters used were 60 kVp and 7 mA with different exposure times for separate imaging part which are described in the...
Results
The DAP values measured for each series of teeth are presented in the table 2.
Those values were found to be consistent with the DAP values described in some similar articles [4-6].
Those values can wary from author to author in a range from 1.46 up to 5.10 µGy m^2.
With the use of the Dap values for separate imaging area and the data for different combinations used for the full mouth series the cumulative doses were calculated.
The average DAP in the full mouth...
Conclusion
Based on that results we can see that the doses in full mouth series are five times higher than the dose in panoramic imaging.
Based on that we recommend the use of panoramic dental imaging instead of full mouth series for a preliminary radiographic image.
References
1.
Whaites E (2007).
Essentials of dental radiography and radiology.
4th ed.
Edinburgh; New York: Churchill Livingstone.
2.
Thomson EM,
Johnson ON (2012).
Essentials of Dental Radiography.
9th ed.
Tennessee State University,
Nashville,
TN.
3.
White S C,
Pharoah M J (2009).
Oral radiology: principles and interpretation.
6th ed.
St.
Louis,
Mo.: Mosby/Elsevier.
4.
Poppe B,
Looe HK,
Pfaffenberger a,
Eenboom F,
Chofor N,
Sering M,
Rühmann a,
Poplawski a,
Willborn K (2007).
Radiation exposure and dose evaluation in intraoral dental radiology.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry...