DOI 10.1016/j.oooo.2023.07.005
Evaluation of 2- and 3-dimensional anatomic parameters of C-shaped root canals with cone beam computed tomography, microcomputed tomography, and nanocomputed tomography.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to evaluate 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D morphometric parameters of C-shaped root canals on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and microcomputed tomography (microCT) images using nanocomputed tomography (nanoCT) as the reference standard.
STUDY
DESIGN
Sixty mandibular molars with C-shaped canals were individually scanned using nanoCT and microCT. Cone beam computed tomography acquisitions were then performed with 4 CBCT systems, using high and standard resolutions. The 2D parameters of roundness and major and minor diameters were obtained in the cross sections of the root canals at 1, 2, and 3 mm from the root apex. The 3D parameters of surface area, volume, and structure model index were measured considering the entire extension of the root canals. Absolute error (AE) in measurement was calculated against the nanoCT values. Data were statistically analyzed with the Shapiro-Wilk test and analysis of variance (α = 0.05).
RESULTS
No significant differences in AE were discovered for the 2D parameters among microCT and the CBCT scans. The AE values for the 3D parameters of volume and surface area were significantly smaller in microCT compared to all CBCT units (P < .05). Significantly lower AE values for surface area were observed in high resolution compared to standard resolution for all CBCT units (P < .05). Structure model index did not differ significantly among microCT and all CBCT protocols.
CONCLUSIONS
Cone beam computed tomography images showed accuracy for evaluating 2D parameters and over- and underestimation for 3D parameters.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.