Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Endod. 2012 Mar;38(3):305-8. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.10.012. Epub 2011 Dec 6.
The aim of this study was to determine if cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) enhancement filters influence the diagnosis of simulated external root resorption (ERR).
Buccal, mesial, and distal root surfaces of 20 single-rooted premolar teeth were evaluated for the presence or absence of simulated defects. Images were obtained using a Classic i-CAT CBCT device (Imaging Sciences International, Inc, Hatfield, PA) and analyzed by 3 oral radiologists. Evaluations were performed with and without CBCT filters. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined. The McNemar test verified the disagreement between all images versus the gold standard and original images versus images with filters; P values < .05 were considered statistically significant. Inter- and intraobserver agreement was calculated by the kappa test.
The means of intra- and interobserver agreement ranged from good to excellent. Sharpen 3×3 had the highest sensitivity (0.64), accuracy (0.62), and negative predictive value (0.33). Specificity was the highest (0.56) for S9, Smooth, Smooth 3×3, and Angio Sharpen High filters. Positive predictive values were the highest (0.81) for the Smooth 3×3 and Angio Sharpen High filters. The McNemar test showed statistically significant differences from the gold standard for all images (P < .05) as well as for original images versus images with the Shadow filter (P = .01). The other filters did not show statistically significant differences from the original images.
The influence of enhancement CBCT filters on ERR diagnosis is small. The Sharpen 3×3 filter gave the best results and the Shadow filter the worst results.
本研究旨在确定锥形束 CT（CBCT）增强滤波器是否会影响模拟外吸收（ERR）的诊断。
评估 20 颗单根前磨牙的颊侧、近中侧和远中侧根面是否存在模拟缺陷。使用 Classic i-CAT CBCT 设备（Imaging Sciences International，Inc.，Hatfield，PA）获取图像，并由 3 位口腔放射科医生进行分析。评估时是否使用 CBCT 滤波器。确定准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值。McNemar 检验验证了所有图像与金标准之间以及原始图像与滤波器图像之间的不一致性；P 值<.05 被认为具有统计学意义。通过 Kappa 检验计算了观察者间和观察者内的一致性。
观察者间和观察者内的一致性均值从良好到优秀。锐化 3×3 具有最高的敏感性（0.64）、准确性（0.62）和阴性预测值（0.33）。S9、平滑、平滑 3×3 和血管锐化高滤波器的特异性最高（0.56）。平滑 3×3 和血管锐化高滤波器的阳性预测值最高（0.81）。McNemar 检验显示，所有图像均与金标准存在统计学差异（P<.05），原始图像与带阴影滤波器的图像也存在统计学差异（P=.01）。其他滤波器与原始图像无统计学差异。
增强 CBCT 滤波器对 ERR 诊断的影响较小。锐化 3×3 滤波器的效果最好，阴影滤波器的效果最差。
