posterpresentation
Description

Title: 1378 - CBCT With Different Voxel Sizes Versus Digital Periapical Radiography in Detection of External Resorption

Authors:

Amr Omar, Misr International University
Kareem Eid, State University of New York at Geneseo
Rowida Abdalla (Presenter)
University of Kentucky

Abstract:

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images acquired with 2 different voxel sizes, and digital periapical radiographs in diagnosing external resorption lesions.

Methods: This study included 280 root surfaces from a sample of 46 extracted permanent teeth. Surfaces were randomly divided into two groups; Group A: Experimental group (N=138) and Group B: control (N = 142). Group A was further divided to 9 subgroups according to the size of the lesion created: A1 , A2, and A3, and according to the location of the lesion; apical (A), middle (M) or cervical (C) thirds. Group A cavitated lesions were simulated by drilling holes on the root surfaces with a size ¼, 2 and 4 round bur for subgroups A1, A2 and A3 respectively. The teeth were mounted in sticky wax and a rubber glove filled with water was used to simulate soft tissues. All teeth were radiographed under standardized conditions; Direct digital images were obtained using a Schick Elite direct digital intraoral CCD sensor to obtain periapical radiographs. I-CAT 17-19 model scanner was used to obtain the CBCT scans with a field of view 8 X 5 cm, the scans were obtained with 2 voxel sizes; 0.125 and 0.3.

Results: CBCT with 0.125 voxel size showed statistically significantly higher number of correctly diagnosed lesions than both CBCT with 0.3 voxel size and Periapical radiographs. Periapical radiography was significantly less accurate than CBCT scans with both voxel sizes. Comparison between the different groups shows a higher percentage of correctly diagnosed A3 lesions (94.79%) compared to 87.04% A2 lesions, and 64.07 % A1 lesions. The percentage of missed lesions on Buccal/lingual surfaces was 14.29% compared to only 3.29 % on proximal surfaces. The Chi Square test suggests no difference between observers (p-value=0.93)

Conclusions: CBCT scans are more accurate in diagnosing external root resorption compared to Periapical radiographs. A smaller voxel size is preferred and yields a more accurate diagnosis . Buccal and lingual root resorption is more challenging to diagnose compared to proximal resorption lesions.

Image(s):

Download Image 1
Download Image 2

Table(s):

Count
col%
CBCT 0.3 voxel size CBCT 0.125 voxel size Periapical radiography Total
#Missed lesions 51
9.11%
18
3.21%
83
14.28%
152
#Correct diagnosis 509
90.89%
542
96.79%
477
85.18%
1528
Total 560 560 560 1680
Count
Col%
A1 A2 A3 Total
#Missed lesions 97
35.93
35
12.96%
15
5.21%
147
Total # correct diagnosis 173
64.07%
235
87.04%
273
94.79%
681
Total 270 270 288 828
Count
Col%
Buccal/lingual Proximal Total
#Missed lesions 120
14.29%
32
3.81%
152
#Correct diagnosis 720
85.71%
808
96.19%
1528
Total 840 840 1680

Student Presenter

Disclosure Statement:
The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: NONE

Tags