根尖片与锥形束计算机断层扫描在检测种植体周围骨缺损方面的观察者内和观察者间一致性：一项临床研究。

Intra- and inter-observer agreements in detecting peri-implant bone defects between periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography: A clinical study.

作者信息

Zhang Chu-Nan, Zhu Yu, Fan Lin-Feng, Zhang Xiao, Jiang Yin-Hua, Gu Ying-Xin

机构信息

Department of Implant Dentistry, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine; National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases; Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology & Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai, China.

Department of Radiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

J Dent Sci. 2021 Jul;16(3):948-956. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.10.013. Epub 2020 Nov 14.

DOI:10.1016/j.jds.2020.10.013

PMID:34141109

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8189872/

Abstract

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Information regarding agreements between periapical radiograph (PA) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting peri-implant defect is still scarce. The aim of this clinical study was to compare agreements between PA and CBCT in detecting peri-implant bone defect.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective clinical study enrolled 32 patients with both PA and CBCT filmed right after implant placement. Four modalities were used for film reading: PA1 (original), PA2 (enhanced brightness/contrast), CBCT1 (selected axial and mesial-distal direction images) and CBCT2 (all data with software). 2 experienced and 2 inexperienced observers scored all films. Intra- and inter-observer agreements were estimated with Cohen's kappa coefficient. Categorized agreements were compared and differences among four modalities were calculated.

RESULTS

Agreements of PA were better than CBCT when detecting peri-implant bone defects in inter-observer agreements (median kappa 0.471 vs. 0.192; p = 0.016). Moreover, agreements in experienced observers were better than inexperienced observers (median kappa 0.883 vs. 0.567; p < 0.001). There was significant difference among four modalities except for experienced observer 2 (p = 0.218).

CONCLUSION

Agreements of PA are better than CBCT when detecting peri-implant bone defects, especially for inter-observer agreements. Experienced observers are more consistent in assessment than inexperienced ones.

摘要

背景/目的：关于根尖片（PA）和锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）在检测种植体周围缺损方面一致性的信息仍然匮乏。本临床研究的目的是比较PA和CBCT在检测种植体周围骨缺损方面的一致性。

材料与方法

本回顾性临床研究纳入了32例在种植体植入后立即拍摄了PA和CBCT的患者。采用四种方式阅片：PA1（原始片）、PA2（增强亮度/对比度）、CBCT1（选择轴向和近远中方向图像）和CBCT2（使用软件的所有数据）。2名经验丰富的观察者和2名经验不足的观察者对所有片子进行评分。采用Cohen卡方系数评估观察者内和观察者间的一致性。比较分类一致性并计算四种方式之间的差异。

结果

在观察者间一致性方面，检测种植体周围骨缺损时PA的一致性优于CBCT（卡方中位数0.471对0.192；p = 0.016）。此外，经验丰富的观察者的一致性优于经验不足的观察者（卡方中位数0.883对0.567；p < 0.001）。除经验丰富的观察者2外，四种方式之间存在显著差异（p = 0.218）。