Cury Patricia R, Araujo Ney S, Bowie Jon, Sallum Enilson A, Jeffcoat Marjorie K
Department of Microbiology, São Leopoldo-Mandic Dental Research Institute, Campinas, Brazil.
J Periodontol. 2004 Aug;75(8):1145-9. doi: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.8.1145.
Limited information comparing digital subtraction radiographic assessment with conventional radiographic interpretation is available from longitudinal clinical trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability to detect periodontal bone changes during the long-term maintenance of Class II furcation defects by conventional radiographic interpretation compared to interpretation of digital subtraction images.
Standardized radiographs of 18 Class II furcation defects in mandibular molars were taken at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after non-resective periodontal surgery. Conventional radiographic and digital subtraction interpretations were performed masked, respectively, by two and three experienced examiners, according to the following categories: bone gain; bone loss; unchanged appearance; and impossible to visualize. Percent concordance and the kappa statistic value (kappa) were computed.
Conventional radiographic and digital subtraction interpretation images resulted in 72 decisions for each examiner. The visual interpretation of digital subtraction images by two examiners revealed the same results. The interpretation of conventional radiographic images showed a low concordance between examiners (kappa < 0.40) at all examinations. The concordance between subtraction radiography and conventional radiographic interpretation was also low for all examiners (kappa < 0.36) at all examinations. Using subtraction radiography as a reference, bone changed and bone unchanged were diagnosed correctly in 47.2% of cases by examiner A, in 43.1% by examiner B, and in 38.9% by examiner C.
It can be concluded that conventional radiographic interpretation is a more subjective and inaccurate method of detecting periodontal bone changes in Class II furcation defects in mandibular molars when compared with subtraction radiography.
纵向临床试验中关于数字减影放射成像评估与传统放射成像解读相比较的信息有限。本研究的目的是评估与数字减影图像解读相比,通过传统放射成像解读在Ⅱ度根分叉病变长期维护期间检测牙周骨变化的能力。
在下颌磨牙18例Ⅱ度根分叉病变处,于非切除性牙周手术后基线以及术后6、12、18和24个月拍摄标准化X线片。由两名和三名经验丰富的检查者分别对传统放射成像和数字减影成像进行盲法解读,分类如下:骨质增加;骨质丧失;外观无变化;无法观察到。计算一致性百分比和kappa统计值(kappa)。
每位检查者对传统放射成像和数字减影成像解读图像各做出72次判断。两名检查者对数字减影图像的视觉解读结果相同。所有检查中,检查者对传统放射成像图像的解读一致性较低(kappa<0.40)。所有检查中,所有检查者对减影放射成像与传统放射成像解读之间的一致性也较低(kappa<0.36)。以减影放射成像为参照,A检查者在47.2%的病例中正确诊断出骨质改变和骨质未改变,B检查者为43.1%,C检查者为38.9%。
可以得出结论,与减影放射成像相比,传统放射成像解读在检测下颌磨牙Ⅱ度根分叉病变的牙周骨变化方面是一种更主观且不准确的方法。