使用传统口腔内放射摄影、多排螺旋计算机断层扫描和锥形束计算机断层扫描检测牙根穿孔。

Detection of root perforations using conventional and digital intraoral radiography, multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography.

作者信息

Shokri Abbas, Eskandarloo Amir, Noruzi-Gangachin Maruf, Khajeh Samira

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences Dental School, Hamadan, Iran.

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences Dental School, Sanandaj, Iran.

出版信息

Restor Dent Endod. 2015 Feb;40(1):58-67. doi: 10.5395/rde.2015.40.1.58. Epub 2014 Nov 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of conventional intraoral (CI) radiography, photostimulable phosphor (PSP) radiography, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for detection of strip and root perforations in endodontically treated teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mesial and distal roots of 72 recently extracted molar were endodontically prepared. Perforations were created in 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4 mm diameter around the furcation of 48 roots (strip perforation) and at the external surface of 48 roots (root perforation); 48 roots were not perforated (control group). After root obturation, intraoral radiography, CBCT and MDCT were taken. Discontinuity in the root structure was interpreted as perforation. Two observers examined the images. Data were analyzed using Stata software and Chi-square test.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of CI, PSP, CBCT and MDCT in detection of strip perforations were 81.25% and 93.75%, 85.42% and 91.67%, 97.92% and 85.42%, and 72.92% and 87.50%, respectively. For diagnosis of root perforation, the sensitivity and specificity were 87.50% and 93.75%, 89.58% and 91.67%, 97.92% and 85.42%, and 81.25% and 87.50%, respectively. For detection of strip perforation, the difference between CBCT and all other methods including CI, PSP and MDCT was significant (p < 0.05). For detection of root perforation, only the difference between CBCT and MDCT was significant, and for all the other methods no statistically significant difference was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

If it is not possible to diagnose the root perforations by periapical radiographs, CBCT is the best radiographic technique while MDCT is not recommended.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较传统口腔内(CI)放射摄影、光激励荧光体(PSP)放射摄影、锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)和多排探测器计算机断层扫描(MDCT)检测根管治疗后牙齿牙本质撕裂和牙根穿孔的准确性。

材料与方法

选取72颗近期拔除的磨牙,对其近中根和远中根进行根管预备。在48个牙根的根分叉处周围制造直径为0.2、0.3或0.4mm的穿孔(牙本质撕裂穿孔),并在48个牙根的外表面制造穿孔(牙根穿孔);48个牙根未穿孔(对照组)。根管充填后,进行口腔内放射摄影、CBCT和MDCT检查。牙根结构的连续性中断被解释为穿孔。两名观察者对图像进行检查。使用Stata软件和卡方检验对数据进行分析。

结果

CI、PSP、CBCT和MDCT检测牙本质撕裂穿孔的灵敏度和特异度分别为81.25%和93.75%、85.42%和91.67%、97.92%和85.42%、72.92%和87.50%。对于牙根穿孔的诊断,灵敏度和特异度分别为87.50%和93.75%、89.58%和91.67%、97.92%和85.42%、81.25%和87.50%。对于牙本质撕裂穿孔的检测,CBCT与包括CI、PSP和MDCT在内的所有其他方法之间的差异具有统计学意义(p<0.05)。对于牙根穿孔的检测,仅CBCT与MDCT之间的差异具有统计学意义,而对于所有其他方法,未观察到统计学上的显著差异。

结论

如果根尖片无法诊断牙根穿孔,CBCT是最佳的放射学技术,而不推荐使用MDCT。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2915/4320278/db7e6c2538ef/rde-40-58-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索