American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2017
Impact of cone-beam computed tomography scan mode on the diagnostic yield of chemically simulated external root resorption.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Sousa Melo Saulo L, Vasconcelos Karla de Faria, Holton Nathan, Allareddy Veeratrishul, Allareddy Veerasathpurush, Tabchoury Cinthia Pereira Machado, Haiter-Neto Francisco, Ruprecht Axel
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the influence of cone-beam computed tomography scans on the diagnosis of chemically simulated external root resorption.
METHODS: One hundred extracted anterior teeth were selected. Subsurface demineralization was induced on a limited area of the apical third of the root of 49 teeth. Each tooth was placed in an empty socket of a partially edentulous dry mandible. Cone-beam computed tomography images were obtained according to 3 protocols: (1) half scan, 0.40-mm voxel size; (2) full scan, 0.40-mm voxel size; and (3) full scan, 0.125-mm voxel size. Three observers evaluated the images. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve were compared with the Cochran Q and Mann-Whitney U tests.
RESULTS: Protocol 3 had the highest sensitivity (81.63%), accuracy (80.67%), and area under the curve (0.807). There were statistically significant differences between protocol 3 and the other 2 protocols (P <0.001). The specificity of protocol 1 (84.97%) was greater than that of protocols 2 (69.93%) and 3 (79.74%); however, a statistically significant difference was found only between protocols 1 and 2 (P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: A more dedicated, high-resolution scan should be acquired when one intends to investigate the early stage of external root resorption during orthodontic treatment. However, this does not imply that all orthodontic patients should be subjected to high-dose cone-beam computed tomography scans.
METHODS: One hundred extracted anterior teeth were selected. Subsurface demineralization was induced on a limited area of the apical third of the root of 49 teeth. Each tooth was placed in an empty socket of a partially edentulous dry mandible. Cone-beam computed tomography images were obtained according to 3 protocols: (1) half scan, 0.40-mm voxel size; (2) full scan, 0.40-mm voxel size; and (3) full scan, 0.125-mm voxel size. Three observers evaluated the images. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve were compared with the Cochran Q and Mann-Whitney U tests.
RESULTS: Protocol 3 had the highest sensitivity (81.63%), accuracy (80.67%), and area under the curve (0.807). There were statistically significant differences between protocol 3 and the other 2 protocols (P <0.001). The specificity of protocol 1 (84.97%) was greater than that of protocols 2 (69.93%) and 3 (79.74%); however, a statistically significant difference was found only between protocols 1 and 2 (P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: A more dedicated, high-resolution scan should be acquired when one intends to investigate the early stage of external root resorption during orthodontic treatment. However, this does not imply that all orthodontic patients should be subjected to high-dose cone-beam computed tomography scans.