Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online: 283

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 26  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 619-626
Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of root perforation, external resorption and fractures using cone-beam computed tomography, panoramic radiography and conventional & digital periapical radiography


1 Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Sergipe, Sāo Cristóvāo, Brazil
2 Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringa, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Prof. Wilton Mitsunari Takeshita
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Sergipe, Sāo Cristóvāo
Brazil
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.176927

Rights and Permissions

Context: Some radicular changes are challenging for clinicians to diagnose, such as of root perforations, external root resorption (ERR), and vertical root fractures (VRFs). This study aims to facilitate it by comparing the diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), orthopantomography, and conventional and digital periapical radiography (DPR) in the diagnosis of such problems. Is it worth doing CBCT despite the radiation dose? Aims: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT, panoramic radiography, and conventional and DPR in the diagnosis of root perforation (RP), ERR, and VRF. Materials and Methods: The sample consisted of 40 extracted human teeth and 10 macerated human mandibles. RPs were performed using diamond burs, ERRs using spherical carbide burs, and RFs using a universal machine EMIC-DL 1000. The images were evaluated by 6 dentomaxillofacial radiologists. Results: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) revealed that CBCT showed the highest area under the ROC curve (Az) values for RP, ERR, and VRF (0.903, 0.950, and 0.849, respectively). The worst Az values for RP, ERR, and VRF (0.718, 0.494, and 0.611, respectively) were for panoramic radiography. Conclusions: CBCT showed the best results in the diagnosis of ERR and VRF. The diagnosis of ERR was the least accurate, panoramic radiography being not appropriate for its diagnosis. CBCT and conventional periapical radiography obtained similar results for the evaluation of RP. So for, RP indicate the conventional periapical radiography because CBCT has a higher radiation dose.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2765    
    Printed107    
    Emailed3    
    PDF Downloaded103    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal