The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2020
Comparison of Three-Dimensional and Conventional Orthodontic Imaging Modalities for Localization of Impacted Maxillary Canines in Patients With Alveolar Cleft.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Padisar Parviz, Tofangchiha Maryam, Salari Behzad, Oveisi Sonia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify which diagnostic parameters related to impacted maxillary canines can be reliably detected by the conventional orthodontic radiographic modalities and which factors need to be assessed by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, 8 orthodontists evaluated 7 parameters related to the position and anatomy of the impacted canines by means of 2-dimensional (2D) records. After 1 month, the same process was repeated by means of CBCT by the same clinicians.
SETTING: Qazvin University of Medical Sciences.
PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two patients with alveolar cleft and impacted maxillary canines who had CBCT scans, lateral cephalograms, and orthopantomographs as pretreatment records.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The diagnostic accuracy of 2D and 3-dimensional (3D) radiographic modalities was compared with each other and also with the gold standard by 3 radiologists.
RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of 2D and 3D imaging modalities was not significantly different regarding the mesiodistal inclination of the impacted tooth (P = .09), apex anatomy (P = .10), and mesiodistal position of the apex (P = .19). Cone-beam computed tomography had significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional radiographic modalities regarding overlapping the adjacent tooth (P = .001), labio-palatal and apico-coronal position of the crown tip, and root resorption of the adjacent tooth (P = .01).
CONCLUSION: The conventional orthodontic radiographic modalities were as accurate as CBCT for determination of impacted canine inclination, apex anatomy, and mesiodistal position of the apex. Cone-beam computed tomography showed higher diagnostic accuracy for other parameters.
DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, 8 orthodontists evaluated 7 parameters related to the position and anatomy of the impacted canines by means of 2-dimensional (2D) records. After 1 month, the same process was repeated by means of CBCT by the same clinicians.
SETTING: Qazvin University of Medical Sciences.
PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two patients with alveolar cleft and impacted maxillary canines who had CBCT scans, lateral cephalograms, and orthopantomographs as pretreatment records.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The diagnostic accuracy of 2D and 3-dimensional (3D) radiographic modalities was compared with each other and also with the gold standard by 3 radiologists.
RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of 2D and 3D imaging modalities was not significantly different regarding the mesiodistal inclination of the impacted tooth (P = .09), apex anatomy (P = .10), and mesiodistal position of the apex (P = .19). Cone-beam computed tomography had significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional radiographic modalities regarding overlapping the adjacent tooth (P = .001), labio-palatal and apico-coronal position of the crown tip, and root resorption of the adjacent tooth (P = .01).
CONCLUSION: The conventional orthodontic radiographic modalities were as accurate as CBCT for determination of impacted canine inclination, apex anatomy, and mesiodistal position of the apex. Cone-beam computed tomography showed higher diagnostic accuracy for other parameters.