Volume 9, Issue 4 (12-2021)                   Jorjani Biomed J 2021, 9(4): 22-32 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Habibi Kia A, dabaghi A, nikdast P. The Effect of Magnification for Detecting Low and High Internal Root Resorption in Single-Root Teeth in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (An in-Vitro Study). Jorjani Biomed J. 2021; 9 (4) :22-32
URL: http://goums.ac.ir/jorjanijournal/article-1-814-en.html
1- Assistant Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
2- Associate Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran , DABAGHI-A@AJUMS.AC.IR
3- Undergraduate Student of Dentistry,Faculty of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences. Ahvaz, Iran
Abstract:   (148 Views)
Background and Objective: Early detection of Internal Root Resorption (IRR) is considered a challenging issue in endodontics. Processing filters are used to facilitate image interpretation either in diagnostic or treatment procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of magnification changes on the detection of IRR in Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images.
Material and Methods: In this study, a total of 34healthy single-canal & rooted teeth were split mesiodistally through their medial canal using an ultra thin metal saw (1 mm). Then, absorption cavities were artificially created in both low and high degree absorption forms. CBCT images with three different magnification levels of 50, 100 and 150 were analyzed by one  radiologist and one endodontist before and after artificial cavity creation. Gathered data were analyzed by MacNemar and Kappa tests using SPSS statistical software. Overall accuracy was calculated by the Area Under the Curve (AUC).
Results: Calculated percentages of sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy for the first(with high image magnification) and second (with low image magnification) observer were the same (100%, 88.24% and 94%, respectively) and there was no significance difference between low and high degree of resorption and also different magnifications with reality.
Conclusion: Depending on its method of application, all levels of magnification for CBCT images are suitable in diagnosis of IRR.
     
Type of Article: Original article | Subject: General medicine
Received: 2021/03/13 | Accepted: 2021/11/9 | Published: 2021/12/28

References
1. Patel S, Dawood A, Wilson R, Horner K, Mannocci F. The detection and management of root resorption lesions using intraoral radiography and cone beam computed tomography - an in vivo investigation. IntEndod J 2009;42(9):831-8 [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
2. LyroudiaKM, DourouVI, PantelidouOC, LabrianidisT, PitasIK. Internal root resorption studied by radiography, stereomicroscope, scanning electron microscope and computerized 3D reconstructive method. Dent Traumatol 2002; 18(3):148-52. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
3. Kamburoglu K, Kursun S. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT images of different voxel resolutions used to detect simulated small internal resorption cavities. IntEndod J 2010; 43(9):798-807. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
4. Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC. Ingle's Endodontics. 6th ed. Hamilton: BC Decker; 2019. P 1370. [Google Scholar]
5. White SC, Pharoah MJ, eds. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation.6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2009. P 215-30,355. [Google Scholar]
6. Sigurdsson A, Trope M, Chivian N. The Role of EndodonticsAfter Dental Traumatic Injuries. In: Hargreaves KM, Cohen S, editors. Cohen's Pathways of the Pulp. 11th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2016. P 618-50. [view at publisher] [Google Scholar]
7. Caliskan MK and M. Turkun M. Prognosis of permanent teeth with internal resorption: a clinical review, Dent Traumatol 1997; 13(2):75-81. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
8. White SC, Pharoah MJ. The evolution and application of dental maxillofacial imaging modalities. Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52(4):689-705. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
9. Kamburoglu K, Kursun S, Yuksel S, Oztas B. Observer ability to detect ex vivo Simulated internal or external cervical root resorption. J Endod 2011; 37(2):168-75. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
10. Estrela C, Bueno MR, De Alencar AH, Mattar R, ValladaresNeto J, et al. Method to evaluate inflammatory root resorption by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod 2009; 35(11):1491-7. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
11. Cohenca N, Simon JH, Mathur A, Malfaz JM. Clinical indications for digital imaging in dento-alveolar trauma. Part 2: root resorption. Dent Traumatol 2007; 23(2):105-13. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
12. Patel S. New dimensions in endodontic imaging: Part 2: Cone beam computed tomography. IntEndod J 2009; 42(6):463-75. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
13. Kamburoglu K, Barenboim SF, Kaffe I. Comparison of Conventional film with different digital and digitally filtered images in the detection of simulated internal resorption cavities: an ex vivo study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral RadiolEndod 2008; 105(6):790-7. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
14. Khalilak Z, Dadresanfar B, Mehralizade S, fallahdoost A, Mokhberi L. Comparison of The Diagnostic Quality Of the Conventional and Digital Radiography in Detection of External Root Resorption Cavities (Invitro). J Res Dent Sci 2012; 8(4):194-9. [Google Scholar]
15. Swennen GR, Schutyser F. Three-dimensional cephalometry:spiral multi-slice vs cone-beam computed tomography. Am JOrthodDentofacialOrthop. 2006; 130(3):410-6. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
16. Lai C, Bornstein M, Mock L, Heuberger B, Dietrich T, KatasarosC.Impacted maxillary canines and root resorptions ofneighbouring teeth:a radiographic analysisusing cone-beam computedtomography.European Journal of Orthodontics 2012;35(2013)529-538 [view at publisher] [DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjs037] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
17. White SC,PharoahMJ.Oral radiology principle and interpretation.6th ed.Philadelphia:Elsevier;2019.71-92,265-277. [Google Scholar]
18. Marques AP, Perrella A, Arita ES, Pereira MF, Cavalcanti M. Assessment of simulated mandibular condyle bone lesions by cone beam computed tomography. Braz Oral Res. 2010 Oct/Dec; 24(4):467-74. [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
19. Carrafiello G, Dizonno M, Colli V, Strocchi S, Pozzi TS, Leonardi A, et al. Comparative study of jaws with multislice computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography. Radiol Med. [Comparative Study; Journal Article]. 2010; 115(4):600-11. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
20. Farhadi N, Shokraneh A, Saatchi M. Effect of different levels of sharpness processing filter on the measurement accuracy of endodontic file length. Dental Hypotheses. 2016; 7(1):15. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
21. Akarslan ZZ, Akdevelioğlu M, Güngör K, Erten H. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of bitewing, periapical, unfiltered and filtered digital panoramic images for approximal caries detection in posterior teeth. Dentomaxillofacial. Radiol. . 2008 Dec; 37(8):458-63. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
22. 36-Westphalen VPD, de Moraes IG, Westphalen FH, Martins WD, Souza PC. Conventional and digital radiographic methods in the detection of simulated external root resorptions: a comparative study. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2014;33(4):233-235 [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
23. Guarnieri R, Cavallini C, Vernucci R, Vichi M, Leonardi R, Barbato E.Impacted maxillary canines and root resorption of adjacent teeth:A retrospective observational study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2016;21(6)743-50 [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
24. MehrAliZadeh S, Talayi poor A, Mehrvarzfar P, Edalat M, SHarifiSHoushtari S. Comparison between digital intraoral radiography (PSP) and Cone Beam CT images in detection internal root resorption (in-vitro study). J Res Dent Sci. 2016; 13(2):102-8. [view at publisher] [Google Scholar]
25. Scarfe W, Farman A. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography. In: White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology principle and interpretation. 6th ed. Louis Missouri: Mosby USA; 2009. P.225-243. [view at publisher] [Google Scholar]
26. Estrela C, Bueno MR, De Alencar AH, Mattar R, ValladaresNeto J, et all. Method to evaluate inflammatory root resorption by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod 2009; 35(11):1491-7. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
27. Kajkolahi A. Evaluation of the magnification and brightness effect for detecting impacted tooth-induced external root resorption, in mid root area of single root teeth in cone beam computed tomography( An ex-vivo study). Doctoral dissertation.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz JundiShapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran. 2018.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2021 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Jorjani Biomedicine Journal

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb