Clinical oral investigations · 2021
Diagnostic accuracy of CBCT compared to panoramic radiography in predicting IAN exposure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Reia Veronica Caroline Brito, de Toledo Telles-Araujo Gabriel, Peralta-Mamani Mariela, Biancardi Mariel Ruivo, Rubira Cássia Maria Fischer, Rubira-Bullen Izabel Regina Fischer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to verify whether the diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is superior to panoramic radiography (PR) in predicting inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) exposure during the lower third molar extraction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched up to September 2020. Studies that evaluated the accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, and negative predictive value) of both imaging methods were included. The gold standard was the visualization of the IAN exposure during the extraction of lower third molars. The gray literature was also used to include any other paper that might meet the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis was performed with OpenMeta-Analyst and ReviewManager v.5.3 software. The methodology of the studies was evaluated using QUADAS-2.
RESULTS: Among the search, three studies met all the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis was conducted with all included studies. Accuracy values for CBCT were 95.1% for sensitivity (p=0.666) and 64.4% for specificity (p<0.001). For PR sensitivity and specificity, we observed 73.9% (p=0.101) and 24.8% (p<0.001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both exams were reliable for detecting positive cases of exposure of the IAN. However, CBCT had a better performance compared to PT in predicting IAN exposure during surgery.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To better understand the CBCT accuracy in predicting the IAN exposure during surgery, since this event can increase the likelihood of IAN injury and, consequently, cause neurosensory disturbances.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched up to September 2020. Studies that evaluated the accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, and negative predictive value) of both imaging methods were included. The gold standard was the visualization of the IAN exposure during the extraction of lower third molars. The gray literature was also used to include any other paper that might meet the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis was performed with OpenMeta-Analyst and ReviewManager v.5.3 software. The methodology of the studies was evaluated using QUADAS-2.
RESULTS: Among the search, three studies met all the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis was conducted with all included studies. Accuracy values for CBCT were 95.1% for sensitivity (p=0.666) and 64.4% for specificity (p<0.001). For PR sensitivity and specificity, we observed 73.9% (p=0.101) and 24.8% (p<0.001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both exams were reliable for detecting positive cases of exposure of the IAN. However, CBCT had a better performance compared to PT in predicting IAN exposure during surgery.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To better understand the CBCT accuracy in predicting the IAN exposure during surgery, since this event can increase the likelihood of IAN injury and, consequently, cause neurosensory disturbances.