Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination?
Aim: A clinical study was done to assess the clinical diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting proximal cavitated carious lesions in order to determine whether cavitation should be reported when a CBCT examination is available. Materials and Methods: 79 adjacent proxi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Caries research 2014-01, Vol.48 (3), p.208-213 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 213 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 208 |
container_title | Caries research |
container_volume | 48 |
creator | Sansare, K. Singh, D. Sontakke, S. Karjodkar, F. Saxena, V. Frydenberg, M. Wenzel, A. |
description | Aim: A clinical study was done to assess the clinical diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting proximal cavitated carious lesions in order to determine whether cavitation should be reported when a CBCT examination is available. Materials and Methods: 79 adjacent proximal surfaces without restorations in permanent teeth were examined. Patients suspected to have carious lesions after a visual clinical and a bitewing examination participated in a CBCT examination (Kodak 9000 3D, 5 × 3.7 cm field of view, voxel size 0.07 mm). Ethical approval and informed consent were obtained according to the Helsinki Declaration. Radiographic assessment recording lesions with or without cavitation was performed by two observers in bitewings and CBCT sections. Orthodontic separators were placed interdentally between two lesion-suspected surfaces. The separator was removed after 3 days and the surfaces recorded as cavitated (yes/no), i.e. validated clinically. Differences between the two radiographic modalities (sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy) were estimated by analyzing the binary data in a generalized linear model. Results: For both observers, sensitivity was significantly higher for CBCT than for bitewings (average difference 33%, p < 0.001) while specificity was not significantly different between the methods (p = 0.19). The overall accuracy was also significantly higher for CBCT (p < 0.001). Conclusion: CBCT was more accurate in detecting cavitation in proximal surfaces than bitewing radiographs; therefore a CBCT examination performed for other clinical applications should also be assessed for proximal surface cavities in teeth without restorations, and when detected, this pathology must be part of the dentist's report. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1159/000354838 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_karge</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524398023</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1524398023</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-f110cac80129997b0d6dc0994c1cba3c3ebbe4883c24807cfb91118cfd74755d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0c9P2zAUB3ALbRqF7cAdoUhc4BD2Xuw49mmCCjYkJBA_JG6Z4zg0JYkzO0Htf4-7dj1w2snWVx8_ye9LyAHCGWIqvwMATZmgYodMkCUYy4w_fyKTkIuYp1zskj3v5wDIOBdfyG7CmEAAPiG_H2Z2bMpoqt7qQQ217aK6i-6cXdStaqKH0VVKGx9dmOje9NYNplyBqe1MyFQbbm0_rtJH29oXp_rZMrpcqLbu_k778ZV8rlTjzbfNuU-eri4fp7_im9uf19Pzm1hTng1xhQhaaQGYSCmzAkpeapCSadSFopqaojBMCKoTJiDTVSERUeiqzFiWpiXdJyfrub2zf0bjh7ytvTZNozpjR59jmjAqBST0PygKniAFDPT4A53b0XXhI0ExyCiGVQZ1ulbaWe-dqfLehfW5ZY6QrxrKtw0Fe7SZOBatKbfyXyUBHK7Bq3Ivxm3B5v075OmScQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1540731244</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Karger Journals</source><creator>Sansare, K. ; Singh, D. ; Sontakke, S. ; Karjodkar, F. ; Saxena, V. ; Frydenberg, M. ; Wenzel, A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sansare, K. ; Singh, D. ; Sontakke, S. ; Karjodkar, F. ; Saxena, V. ; Frydenberg, M. ; Wenzel, A.</creatorcontrib><description>Aim: A clinical study was done to assess the clinical diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting proximal cavitated carious lesions in order to determine whether cavitation should be reported when a CBCT examination is available. Materials and Methods: 79 adjacent proximal surfaces without restorations in permanent teeth were examined. Patients suspected to have carious lesions after a visual clinical and a bitewing examination participated in a CBCT examination (Kodak 9000 3D, 5 × 3.7 cm field of view, voxel size 0.07 mm). Ethical approval and informed consent were obtained according to the Helsinki Declaration. Radiographic assessment recording lesions with or without cavitation was performed by two observers in bitewings and CBCT sections. Orthodontic separators were placed interdentally between two lesion-suspected surfaces. The separator was removed after 3 days and the surfaces recorded as cavitated (yes/no), i.e. validated clinically. Differences between the two radiographic modalities (sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy) were estimated by analyzing the binary data in a generalized linear model. Results: For both observers, sensitivity was significantly higher for CBCT than for bitewings (average difference 33%, p < 0.001) while specificity was not significantly different between the methods (p = 0.19). The overall accuracy was also significantly higher for CBCT (p < 0.001). Conclusion: CBCT was more accurate in detecting cavitation in proximal surfaces than bitewing radiographs; therefore a CBCT examination performed for other clinical applications should also be assessed for proximal surface cavities in teeth without restorations, and when detected, this pathology must be part of the dentist's report.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-6568</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1421-976X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1159/000354838</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24481006</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CAREBK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel, Switzerland: S. Karger AG</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Bicuspid - diagnostic imaging ; Bicuspid - pathology ; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography - standards ; Dental Caries - diagnosis ; Dental Caries - diagnostic imaging ; Dentistry ; Female ; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - standards ; Linear Models ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Molar - diagnostic imaging ; Molar - pathology ; Observer Variation ; Original Paper ; Physical Examination ; Radiography, Bitewing - methods ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tooth Crown - diagnostic imaging ; Tooth Crown - pathology ; Tooth Discoloration - diagnosis ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Caries research, 2014-01, Vol.48 (3), p.208-213</ispartof><rights>2014 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><rights>Copyright (c) 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-f110cac80129997b0d6dc0994c1cba3c3ebbe4883c24807cfb91118cfd74755d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-f110cac80129997b0d6dc0994c1cba3c3ebbe4883c24807cfb91118cfd74755d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,2429,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24481006$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sansare, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sontakke, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karjodkar, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saxena, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frydenberg, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wenzel, A.</creatorcontrib><title>Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination?</title><title>Caries research</title><addtitle>Caries Res</addtitle><description>Aim: A clinical study was done to assess the clinical diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting proximal cavitated carious lesions in order to determine whether cavitation should be reported when a CBCT examination is available. Materials and Methods: 79 adjacent proximal surfaces without restorations in permanent teeth were examined. Patients suspected to have carious lesions after a visual clinical and a bitewing examination participated in a CBCT examination (Kodak 9000 3D, 5 × 3.7 cm field of view, voxel size 0.07 mm). Ethical approval and informed consent were obtained according to the Helsinki Declaration. Radiographic assessment recording lesions with or without cavitation was performed by two observers in bitewings and CBCT sections. Orthodontic separators were placed interdentally between two lesion-suspected surfaces. The separator was removed after 3 days and the surfaces recorded as cavitated (yes/no), i.e. validated clinically. Differences between the two radiographic modalities (sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy) were estimated by analyzing the binary data in a generalized linear model. Results: For both observers, sensitivity was significantly higher for CBCT than for bitewings (average difference 33%, p < 0.001) while specificity was not significantly different between the methods (p = 0.19). The overall accuracy was also significantly higher for CBCT (p < 0.001). Conclusion: CBCT was more accurate in detecting cavitation in proximal surfaces than bitewing radiographs; therefore a CBCT examination performed for other clinical applications should also be assessed for proximal surface cavities in teeth without restorations, and when detected, this pathology must be part of the dentist's report.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Bicuspid - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Bicuspid - pathology</subject><subject>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography - standards</subject><subject>Dental Caries - diagnosis</subject><subject>Dental Caries - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - standards</subject><subject>Linear Models</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Molar - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Molar - pathology</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Physical Examination</subject><subject>Radiography, Bitewing - methods</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tooth Crown - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Tooth Crown - pathology</subject><subject>Tooth Discoloration - diagnosis</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0008-6568</issn><issn>1421-976X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNqN0c9P2zAUB3ALbRqF7cAdoUhc4BD2Xuw49mmCCjYkJBA_JG6Z4zg0JYkzO0Htf4-7dj1w2snWVx8_ye9LyAHCGWIqvwMATZmgYodMkCUYy4w_fyKTkIuYp1zskj3v5wDIOBdfyG7CmEAAPiG_H2Z2bMpoqt7qQQ217aK6i-6cXdStaqKH0VVKGx9dmOje9NYNplyBqe1MyFQbbm0_rtJH29oXp_rZMrpcqLbu_k778ZV8rlTjzbfNuU-eri4fp7_im9uf19Pzm1hTng1xhQhaaQGYSCmzAkpeapCSadSFopqaojBMCKoTJiDTVSERUeiqzFiWpiXdJyfrub2zf0bjh7ytvTZNozpjR59jmjAqBST0PygKniAFDPT4A53b0XXhI0ExyCiGVQZ1ulbaWe-dqfLehfW5ZY6QrxrKtw0Fe7SZOBatKbfyXyUBHK7Bq3Ivxm3B5v075OmScQ</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>Sansare, K.</creator><creator>Singh, D.</creator><creator>Sontakke, S.</creator><creator>Karjodkar, F.</creator><creator>Saxena, V.</creator><creator>Frydenberg, M.</creator><creator>Wenzel, A.</creator><general>S. Karger AG</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination?</title><author>Sansare, K. ; Singh, D. ; Sontakke, S. ; Karjodkar, F. ; Saxena, V. ; Frydenberg, M. ; Wenzel, A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-f110cac80129997b0d6dc0994c1cba3c3ebbe4883c24807cfb91118cfd74755d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Bicuspid - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Bicuspid - pathology</topic><topic>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography - standards</topic><topic>Dental Caries - diagnosis</topic><topic>Dental Caries - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - standards</topic><topic>Linear Models</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Molar - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Molar - pathology</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Physical Examination</topic><topic>Radiography, Bitewing - methods</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tooth Crown - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Tooth Crown - pathology</topic><topic>Tooth Discoloration - diagnosis</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sansare, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sontakke, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karjodkar, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saxena, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frydenberg, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wenzel, A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Caries research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sansare, K.</au><au>Singh, D.</au><au>Sontakke, S.</au><au>Karjodkar, F.</au><au>Saxena, V.</au><au>Frydenberg, M.</au><au>Wenzel, A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination?</atitle><jtitle>Caries research</jtitle><addtitle>Caries Res</addtitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>208</spage><epage>213</epage><pages>208-213</pages><issn>0008-6568</issn><eissn>1421-976X</eissn><coden>CAREBK</coden><abstract>Aim: A clinical study was done to assess the clinical diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting proximal cavitated carious lesions in order to determine whether cavitation should be reported when a CBCT examination is available. Materials and Methods: 79 adjacent proximal surfaces without restorations in permanent teeth were examined. Patients suspected to have carious lesions after a visual clinical and a bitewing examination participated in a CBCT examination (Kodak 9000 3D, 5 × 3.7 cm field of view, voxel size 0.07 mm). Ethical approval and informed consent were obtained according to the Helsinki Declaration. Radiographic assessment recording lesions with or without cavitation was performed by two observers in bitewings and CBCT sections. Orthodontic separators were placed interdentally between two lesion-suspected surfaces. The separator was removed after 3 days and the surfaces recorded as cavitated (yes/no), i.e. validated clinically. Differences between the two radiographic modalities (sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy) were estimated by analyzing the binary data in a generalized linear model. Results: For both observers, sensitivity was significantly higher for CBCT than for bitewings (average difference 33%, p < 0.001) while specificity was not significantly different between the methods (p = 0.19). The overall accuracy was also significantly higher for CBCT (p < 0.001). Conclusion: CBCT was more accurate in detecting cavitation in proximal surfaces than bitewing radiographs; therefore a CBCT examination performed for other clinical applications should also be assessed for proximal surface cavities in teeth without restorations, and when detected, this pathology must be part of the dentist's report.</abstract><cop>Basel, Switzerland</cop><pub>S. Karger AG</pub><pmid>24481006</pmid><doi>10.1159/000354838</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0008-6568 |
ispartof | Caries research, 2014-01, Vol.48 (3), p.208-213 |
issn | 0008-6568 1421-976X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524398023 |
source | MEDLINE; Karger Journals |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Bicuspid - diagnostic imaging Bicuspid - pathology Cone-Beam Computed Tomography - standards Dental Caries - diagnosis Dental Caries - diagnostic imaging Dentistry Female Humans Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - standards Linear Models Male Middle Aged Molar - diagnostic imaging Molar - pathology Observer Variation Original Paper Physical Examination Radiography, Bitewing - methods Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Tooth Crown - diagnostic imaging Tooth Crown - pathology Tooth Discoloration - diagnosis Young Adult |
title | Should Cavitation in Proximal Surfaces Be Reported in Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T15%3A47%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_karge&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Should%20Cavitation%20in%20Proximal%20Surfaces%20Be%20Reported%20in%20Cone%20Beam%20Computed%20Tomography%20Examination?&rft.jtitle=Caries%20research&rft.au=Sansare,%20K.&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=208&rft.epage=213&rft.pages=208-213&rft.issn=0008-6568&rft.eissn=1421-976X&rft.coden=CAREBK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1159/000354838&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_karge%3E1524398023%3C/proquest_karge%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1540731244&rft_id=info:pmid/24481006&rfr_iscdi=true |