Inter J Stomatol ›› 2014, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 514-517.doi: 10.7518/gjkq.2014.05.004

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography with different voxel resolutions and panoramic imaging for detecting simulated apical root resorption

Ren Hongyu, Chen Xin   

  1. Dept. of Orthodontics, Xiangyang Stomatological Hospital, Xiangyang 441003, China
  • Received:2014-04-22 Revised:2014-06-12 Online:2014-09-01 Published:2014-09-01

Abstract:

Objective This study aimed to compare the efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography(CBCT) with different voxel resolutions and panoramic radiography for the detection of simulated external apical root resorption(EARR) in vitro. Methods The study sample consisted of 160 single-rooted premolars for simulating EARR of varying degrees according to four setups: no(intact teeth), mild(cavity of 1.0 mm in diameter and depth on mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual root surface), moderate(0.4, 0.8, 1.2, and 1.6 mm root shortening), and severe (2.4, 2.8, 3.2, and 3.6 mm root shortening). These teeth were imaged by CBCT with two different voxel sizes(0.2 and 0.3 mm) and panoramic radiography. Each root was classified according to defect size(no, mild, moderate, and severe) by three calibrated observers using CBCT and panoramic images. McNemar tests were performed to compare the proportions of correct classification between the methods(0.2 mm voxel vs. 0.3 mm voxel, 0.2 mm voxel vs. panoramic, and 0.3 mm voxel vs. panoramic) for each degree of EARR. Results For panoramic radiography, 57.5% of all samples were correctly classified compared with 85% for 0.2 mm voxel and 81.3% for 0.3 mm voxel, and the differences were significant(P<0.01) between both 0.2 mm voxel and 0.3 mm voxel and panoramic radiography. However, no significant difference was observed between 0.2 mm voxel and 0.3 mm voxel in correct classification for no, mild, severe, and all samples(P>0.05). Conclusion CBCT imaging was more reliable than panoramic radiography for detecting simulated EARR. The 0.3 mm voxel resolution was the better configuration because performed the same as the 0.2 mm voxel resolution in diagnosing simulated EARR but with lower exposure to X-rays.

Key words: cone-beam computed tomography, voxel resolutions, panoramic radiography, apical root resorption

CLC Number: 

  • R 783.5

TrendMD: 
[1] Wu Wenzhi,Feng Da-xing,Chen Chuizhuang,Zhou Lijuan.. Incidence and related factors of middle mesial canals in mandibular first molars in Haikou [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(4): 420-425.
[2] Tian Haonan,Lin Min,Xie Congman,Ren Aishu. Association between ponticulus posticus and maxillary palatally impacted canine: a cone-beam computed tomography study [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(5): 536-540.
[3] Ding Zhangfan,Guo Zhiyong,Miao Cheng,Li Chunjie,Xuan Ming,Wang Xiaoyi,Zhang Zhuang. Application of the cone-beam computed tomography-based three-dimensional visualization technology in the surgery of the jaw cystic lesion [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 180-186.
[4] Zhu Hualing,Yan Yujia,Zou Ling. Research progress on the root canal morphology of maxillary permanent molars by using cone-beam computed tomography [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(6): 699-705.
[5] Zhu Chenyou, Deng Jia, Gan Zhoujie, Liu Liu, Wang Tianlu, Cao Cong, Qu Yili. The application of cone-beam computed tomography in implant surgery of maxillary anterior teeth area [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2018, 45(1): 59-63.
[6] Luo Zhiqiang, Ye Zhongtai. A study of maxillary sinus lateral wall thickness of different population in Xinjiang region using cone-beam CT [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2017, 44(1): 55-58.
[7] Luo Houzhuo, Jia Lihui, Li Chengri, Zhang Wenjun, Zhang Xiaodong.. Comparison of general angle magnitudes measured using two kinds of cephalometric measuring software [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2013, 40(5): 592-594.
[8] Liu Taiqi, Zhou Li, Wang Yanmin.. Current situation and progress of evaluating mesiodistal root angulation by panoramic radiography and cone beam computed tomograph [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2013, 40(1): 102-104.
[9] Xu Ziqing, Feng Jing.. Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography in oral maxillofacial linear measurements [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2012, 39(4): 557-560.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[2] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[3] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[4] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[5] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[6] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[7] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(04): .
[8] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(04): .
[9] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 2004, 31(02): 126 -128 .
[10] . [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2008, 35(S1): .