Division of Oral Radiology, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Int Endod J. 2021 Oct;54(10):1769-1781. doi: 10.1111/iej.13569. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
The effectiveness of the metal artefact reduction (MAR) tool for the detection of vertical root fracture (VRF) by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images is controversial.
To evaluate the effectiveness of the MAR tool on VRF detection involving teeth with intracanal materials in CBCT images.
In September 2019, an electronic search was performed in six databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Lilacs and Embase). The electronic search was updated in May 2020 through searches in Google Scholar and references of included studies (embracing the electronic and gray literature searches). No language or year restrictions were applied. Independently, two reviewers examined titles, abstracts and full texts according to the eligibility criteria that were as follows: diagnostic studies that evaluated the effectiveness of the MAR tool on the diagnosis of VRF in human teeth (laboratory or in vivo studies) on CBCT images. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic of Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). For conducting the meta-analysis, the values of sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were obtained, considering the subgroups with and without MAR active. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation instrument was applied to assess the level of evidence across the studies using GRADEpro software.
A total of 8 laboratory studies were included in both systematic review and meta-analysis. The values of sensitivity, specificity, DOR and AUC to VRF diagnosis with and without MAR active were, respectively, 0.586 and 0.603; 0.699 and 0.713, 3.037 and 3.767; 0.67 and 0.71. The quality of the evidence suggested low confidence in estimating the outcomes.
The MAR tool decreased slightly the diagnostic values of VRF involving teeth with intracanal materials in laboratory studies. However, it is important to highlight that most studies had an uncertain risk of bias.
Although a low level of evidence and high heterogeneity were observed in the included studies, the meta-analysis revealed better diagnosis values for VRF detection when the MAR was deactivated when analysing extracted teeth in a laboratory setting.
PROSPERO-CRD42020145222.
This study was financed in party by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior-Brasil (CAPES).
金属伪影降低(MAR)工具在通过锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像检测垂直根折(VRF)方面的有效性存在争议。
评估 MAR 工具在 CBCT 图像中检测有根管材料的牙齿的 VRF 中的有效性。
2019 年 9 月,在六个数据库(PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane、Lilacs 和 Embase)中进行了电子检索。2020 年 5 月,通过在 Google Scholar 和纳入研究的参考文献中进行搜索,对电子搜索进行了更新(包括电子和灰色文献搜索)。没有语言或年份限制。两名审查员根据以下纳入标准独立检查标题、摘要和全文:评估 MAR 工具在人类牙齿(实验室或体内研究)CBCT 图像上诊断 VRF 有效性的诊断研究。使用诊断准确性研究的质量评估工具-2(QUADAS-2)评估偏倚风险。为了进行荟萃分析,考虑到 MAR 活跃和不活跃的亚组,获得了敏感性、特异性、诊断比值比(DOR)和 ROC 曲线下面积(AUC)的值。使用 GRADEpro 软件,应用推荐评估、发展和评估工具(GRADE)仪器,根据研究评估证据水平。
系统评价和荟萃分析共纳入 8 项实验室研究。有和没有 MAR 活跃时,VRF 诊断的敏感性、特异性、DOR 和 AUC 值分别为 0.586 和 0.603;0.699 和 0.713;3.037 和 3.767;0.67 和 0.71。证据质量表明,估计结果的可信度较低。
MAR 工具在实验室研究中略微降低了涉及有根管材料的牙齿的 VRF 的诊断值。然而,值得强调的是,大多数研究的偏倚风险不确定。
尽管纳入的研究存在低水平的证据和高度的异质性,但荟萃分析显示,在实验室环境中分析提取的牙齿时,当 MAR 被停用时,对 VRF 检测的诊断值更好。
PROSPERO-CRD42020145222。
本研究部分由巴西国家教育和科学技术部(CAPES)资助。