Implant dentistry · 2012
Identification of the mental neurovascular bundle: a comparative study of panoramic radiography and computer tomography.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Forni Andrea, Sánchez-Garcés M Angeles, Gay-Escoda Cosme
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the images of the mental canal in panoramic radiography (PR) and computed tomography (CT) by analyzing the concordance with diagnostic tests and examiners.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The position of the mental foramen (MF), distance to the lower mandibular border, anterior length of the mental loop (ML), agreement between examiners and diagnostic concordance were registered in 50PR and 50CT.
RESULTS: ML was identified (34.5/41%, PR/CT). PR magnification was 36.6% higher than in CT. The anterior extension and distance to the inferior border of the MF was higher for PR (2-6.2 mm). Inter-examiner agreement on CT was good (κ = 0.628) and very good on PR (κ = 0.845).
CONCLUSION: There is a magnification (36.6%) of the images in PR with respect to the CT. Identification of MF and ML is not related to the bone quality. Inter-examiner agreement is better on PR.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The position of the mental foramen (MF), distance to the lower mandibular border, anterior length of the mental loop (ML), agreement between examiners and diagnostic concordance were registered in 50PR and 50CT.
RESULTS: ML was identified (34.5/41%, PR/CT). PR magnification was 36.6% higher than in CT. The anterior extension and distance to the inferior border of the MF was higher for PR (2-6.2 mm). Inter-examiner agreement on CT was good (κ = 0.628) and very good on PR (κ = 0.845).
CONCLUSION: There is a magnification (36.6%) of the images in PR with respect to the CT. Identification of MF and ML is not related to the bone quality. Inter-examiner agreement is better on PR.