Discipline of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Toronto, 124 Edward Street, Toronto, ON M5G 1G6, Canada.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Mar;40(3):141-6. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/58488265.
The purpose of this study is to assess possible diagnostic differences between general dentists (GPs) and oral and maxillofacial radiologists (RGs) in the identification of pathognomonic radiographic features of cemento-osseous dysplasia (COD) and its interpretation.
Using a systematic objective survey instrument, 3 RGs and 3 GPs reviewed 50 image sets of COD and similarly appearing entities (dense bone island, cementoblastoma, cemento-ossifying fibroma, fibrous dysplasia, complex odontoma and sclerosing osteitis). Participants were asked to identify the presence or absence of radiographic features and then to make an interpretation of the images.
RGs identified a well-defined border (odds ratio (OR) 6.67, P < 0.05); radiolucent periphery (OR 8.28, P < 0.005); bilateral occurrence (OR 10.23, P < 0.01); mixed radiolucent/radiopaque internal structure (OR 10.53, P < 0.01); the absence of non-concentric bony expansion (OR 7.63, P < 0.05); and the association with anterior and posterior teeth (OR 4.43, P < 0.05) as key features of COD. Consequently, RGs were able to correctly interpret 79.3% of COD cases. In contrast, GPs identified the absence of root resorption (OR 4.52, P < 0.05) and the association with anterior and posterior teeth (OR 3.22, P = 0.005) as the only key features of COD and were able to correctly interpret 38.7% of COD cases.
There are statistically significant differences between RGs and GPs in the identification and interpretation of the radiographic features associated with COD (P < 0.001). We conclude that COD is radiographically discernable from other similarly appearing entities only if the characteristic radiographic features are correctly identified and then correctly interpreted.
本研究旨在评估普通牙医(GP)和口腔颌面放射科医生(RG)在识别骨-牙样瘤性骨硬化症(COD)的特有放射特征及其解读方面的差异。
使用系统的客观调查工具,3 名 RG 和 3 名 GP 检查了 50 个 COD 和类似表现实体(致密骨岛、骨化性牙瘤、骨化性纤维瘤、纤维结构不良、复合型牙瘤和硬化性骨炎)的图像集。要求参与者识别放射特征的存在与否,然后对图像进行解读。
RG 识别出了清晰的边界(比值比(OR)6.67,P < 0.05);透光边缘(OR 8.28,P < 0.005);双侧发生(OR 10.23,P < 0.01);混合透光/不透光内部结构(OR 10.53,P < 0.01);无非同心性骨膨胀(OR 7.63,P < 0.05);以及与前牙和后牙的关联(OR 4.43,P < 0.05),这些是 COD 的关键特征。因此,RG 能够正确解读 79.3%的 COD 病例。相比之下,GP 仅识别出无牙根吸收(OR 4.52,P < 0.05)和与前牙和后牙的关联(OR 3.22,P = 0.005)是 COD 的唯一关键特征,并且能够正确解读 38.7%的 COD 病例。
RG 和 GP 在识别和解释与 COD 相关的放射特征方面存在统计学显著差异(P < 0.001)。我们得出结论,只有正确识别和正确解释特征性放射特征,才能将 COD 与其他类似表现实体区分开来。