International journal of computerized dentistry · 2019
Incidental findings on craniomaxillofacial cone beam computed tomography in orthodontic patients.
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.
Kocsis Christoph, Sommerlath Sohns Jan M, Graf Isabelle, Dreiseidler Timo, Kreppel Matthias, Rothamel Daniel, Zinser Max, Sommerlath Sohns Helena C, Derlin Thorsten, Braumann Bert, Zöller Joachim E, Ritter Lutz
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in orthodontics is increasingly used for detecting impacted or ectopic teeth or for orthognathic and cleft lip and palate treatment. Incidental findings (IFs) are frequently encountered and often relevant. The aim of this study was to detect the prevalence of relevant pathologies on CBCT scans of orthodontic patients.
METHODS: Over a 6-year period, incidental imaging findings were analyzed in 345 CBCT scans (181 men; 164 women; age 16.3 ± 8.4 years), and subdivided into dental (Group 1), skeletal (Group 2), sinunasal (Group 3), and infrequent other pathologies (Group 4).
RESULTS: A total of 502 IFs were detected in 345 patients (1.4 IFs per patient, on average). Most IFs were found in Group 1 (358 IFs; 71.3%), followed by Group 2 (129 IFs; 25.7%), Group 3 (14 IFs; 2.8%), and Group 4 (1 IF; 0.2%). There were 119 (34.5%) patients with a missing wisdom tooth, 94 (27.3%) with dental aplasia, 71 (20.6%) with dislocations, 33 (9.6%) with partial opacifications, and 27 (7.8%) with signs of sinusitis.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that IFs in orthodontic CBCT scans are frequently encountered, even in younger orthodontic patients. When interpreting CBCT scans, orthodontists should be aware of potential relevant IFs that may require further investigation, change patients' treatment or affect their quality of life.
METHODS: Over a 6-year period, incidental imaging findings were analyzed in 345 CBCT scans (181 men; 164 women; age 16.3 ± 8.4 years), and subdivided into dental (Group 1), skeletal (Group 2), sinunasal (Group 3), and infrequent other pathologies (Group 4).
RESULTS: A total of 502 IFs were detected in 345 patients (1.4 IFs per patient, on average). Most IFs were found in Group 1 (358 IFs; 71.3%), followed by Group 2 (129 IFs; 25.7%), Group 3 (14 IFs; 2.8%), and Group 4 (1 IF; 0.2%). There were 119 (34.5%) patients with a missing wisdom tooth, 94 (27.3%) with dental aplasia, 71 (20.6%) with dislocations, 33 (9.6%) with partial opacifications, and 27 (7.8%) with signs of sinusitis.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that IFs in orthodontic CBCT scans are frequently encountered, even in younger orthodontic patients. When interpreting CBCT scans, orthodontists should be aware of potential relevant IFs that may require further investigation, change patients' treatment or affect their quality of life.