Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of conventional and digital periapical radiography, panoramic radiography, and cone-beam computed tomography in the assessment of alveolar bone loss

评估传统和数字化根尖周X线片、全景X线片和锥形束计算机断层扫描在诊断牙槽骨丢失方面的准确性

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different radiographic methods in the assessment of proximal alveolar bone loss (ABL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: ABL, the distance between cement-enamel junction and alveolar bone crest, was measured in 70 mandibular human teeth - directly on the mandibles (control), using conventional periapical radiography with film holders (Rinn XCP and Han-Shin), digital periapical radiography with complementary metal-oxide semiconductor sensor, conventional panoramic, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Three programs were used to measure ABL on the images: Image tool 3.0 (University of Texas Health Sciences Center, San Antonio, Texas, USA), Kodak Imaging 6.1 (Kodak Dental Imaging 6.1, Carestream Health(®), Rochester, NY, USA), and i-CAT vision 1.6.20. Statistical analysis used ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. RESULTS: The tomographic images showed the highest means, whereas the lowest were found for periapical with Han-Shin. Controls differed from periapical with Han-Shin (P < 0.0001). CBCT differed from panoramic (P = 0.0130), periapical with Rinn XCP (P = 0.0066), periapical with Han-Shin (P < 0.0001), and digital periapical (P = 0.0027). Conventional periapicals with film holders differed from each other (P = 0.0007). Digital periapical differed from conventional periapical with Han-Shin (P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional periapical with Han-Shin film holder was the only method that differed from the controls. CBCT had the closest means to the controls.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。