How Does Voxel Size of Cone-beam Computed Tomography Effect Accurate Detection of Root Strip Perforations
Iranian Endodontic Journal,
Vol. 16 No. 1 (2021),
1 January 2021
,
Page 43-48
https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v16i1.25145
Abstract
Introduction: Our study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of different voxel sizes for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) when detecting strip perforations of variable sizes. We used 0.2 and 0.3 mm3 voxel for detecting root strip perforations. Methods and Materials: This was an in vitro study conducted on 155 extracted humans' mandibular first molars. The teeth were randomly divided into five groups (n=31). Perforation were not induced in the control group. In the remaining four groups, strip perforations of 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 mm diameters were created in the mesiolingual canal using #3 Gates Glidden drills. The CBCT scans were taken first with a 12×9 cm field of view (FOV), 90 kVp, 4 mA, and 0.2 mm3 voxel size for 24 sec and then with a 12×9 cm FOV, 90 kVp, 2 mA, and 0.3 mm3 voxel size for another 24 sec. Two observers evaluated the images and reported the largest diameter of perforations. The results were compared with the gold standard values (determined by an electronic digital caliper) using statistical methods, including the kappa coefficient and generalized estimating equation (P<0.05). Results: Based on the findings of our study, the inter-observer agreement ranged from 58-100%, while the intra-observer agreement was reported to be around 100%. The difference in accuracy between 0.2 and 0.3 mm3 voxel sizes was not statistically significant (P>0.05). In addition, the accuracy of detecting different perforation sizes in the CBCT did not follow a specific pattern. Conclusion: This in vitro study showed that CBCT is a reliable diagnostic tool, and even in lower dosages of 0.3 mm3 voxel size, image resolution and diagnostic accuracy was not affected. Moreover, smaller root perforations could be detected as accurately as larger ones with CBCT.
- Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Diagnosis; Strip Perforation; Voxel Size
How to Cite
References
Perez-Heredia M, Ferrer-Luque CM, Bravo M, Castelo-Baz P, Ruiz-Pinon M, Baca P. Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Study of Root Anatomy and Canal Configuration of Molars in a Spanish Population. Journal of endodontics. 2017;43(9):1511-6.
Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Versiani MA, Moldauer BI, Topham G, Gutmann JL, et al. Comparative accuracy of the Clearing Technique, CBCT and Micro-CT methods in studying the mesial root canal configuration of mandibular first molars. International endodontic journal. 2017;50(1):90-6.
Akbarzadeh N, Aminoshariae A, Khalighinejad N, Palomo JM, Syed A, Kulild JC, et al. The Association between the Anatomic Landmarks of the Pulp Chamber Floor and the Prevalence of Middle Mesial Canals in Mandibular First Molars: An InVivo Analysis. Journal of endodontics. 2017;43(11):1797-801.
Gambarini G, Ropini P, Piasecki L, Costantini R, Carneiro E, Testarelli L, et al. A preliminary assessment of a new dedicated endodontic software for use with CBCT images to evaluate the canal complexity of mandibular molars. International endodontic journal. 2017.
Shemesh H, Cristescu RC, Wesselink PR, Wu MK. The use of cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiographs to diagnose root perforations. Journal of endodontics. 2011;3737(4):513-6.
Shokri A, Eskandarloo A, Noruzi-Gangachin M, Khajeh S. Detection of root perforations using conventional and digital intraoral radiography, multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography. Restorative dentistry&endodontics. 2015;40(1):58-67.
Pace R, Giuliani V, Pagavino G. Mineral trioxide aggregate as repair material for furcal perforation: case series. Journal of endodontics. 2008;34(9):1130-3.
Venskutonis T, Plotino G, Juodzbalys G, Mickeviciene L. Theimportance of cone-beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems: a review of the literature. Journal of endodontics. 2014;40(12):1895-901.
Ozer SY. Detection of vertical root fractures by using cone beam computed tomography with variable voxel sizes in an in vitro model. Journal of endodontics. 2011;37(1):75-9.
Kamburoglu K, Yeta EN, Yilmaz F. An ex vivo comparison of diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in the detection of furcal perforations. Journal of endodontics. 2015;41(5):696-702.
Venskutonis T, Juodzbalys G, Nackaerts O, Mickevicienė L. Influence of voxel size on the diagnostic ability of cone-beam computed tomography to evaluate simulated root perforations. Oral Radiology. 2013;29(2):151-9.
Bragatto FP, Iwaki Filho L, Kasuya AV, Chicarelli M, Queiroz AF, Takeshita WM, et al. Accuracy in the diagnosis of vertical root fractures, external root resorptions, and root perforations using cone-beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes of acquisition. Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD. 2016;19(6):573-7.
Liedke GS, da Silveira HE, da Silveira HL, Dutra V, de Figueiredo JA. Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to evaluatesimulated external root resorption. Journal of endodontics. 2009;35(2):233-5.
Aktan AM, Yildirim C, Karataslioglu E, Ciftci ME, Aksoy F. Effects of voxel size and resolution on the accuracy of endodontic length measurement using cone beam computed tomography. Annals of anatomy = Anatomischer Anzeiger : official organ of the Anatomische Gesellschaft. 2016;208:96-102.
Berutti E, Fedon G. Thickness of cementum/dentin in mesial roots of mandibular first molars. Journal of endodontics. 1992;18(11):545-8.
.Harris SP, Bowles WR, Fok A, McClanahan SB. An anatomic investigation of the mandibular first molar using micro-computed tomography. Journal of endodontics. 2013;39(11):1374-8.
Khojastepour L, Moazami F, Babaei M, Forghani M. Assessment of RootPerforation within Simulated Internal Resorption Cavities Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. Journal of endodontics. 2015;41(9):1520-3.
Ferreira T, Vieira M-T, J C, M S, P.T G. Manufacturing Dental Implants using Powder Injection Molding2016.
Huang RY, Cheng WC, Chen CJ, Lin CD, Lai TM, Shen EC, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of the root morphology of mandibular first molars with distolingual roots. International endodontic journal. 2010;43(6):478-84.
da Silveira HL, Silveira HE, LiedkeGS, Lermen CA, Dos Santos RB, de Figueiredo JA. Diagnostic ability of computed tomography to evaluate external root resorption in vitro. Dento maxillo facial radiology. 2007;36(7):393-6.
Durack C, Patel S, Davies J, Wilson R, Mannocci F. Diagnostic accuracy of small volume cone beam computed tomography and intraoral periapical radiography for the detection of simulated external inflammatory root resorption. International endodontic journal. 2011;44(2):136-47.
D'Addazio PS, Campos CN, Ozcan M, Teixeira HG, Passoni RM, Carvalho AC. A comparative study between cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiographs in the diagnosis of simulated endodontic complications. International endodontic journal. 2011;44(3):218-24.
de Alencar AH, Dummer PM, Oliveira HC, Pecora JD, Estrela C. Procedural errors during root canal preparation using rotary NiTi instruments detected by periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography. Brazilian dental journal. 2010;21(6):543-9.
Janner SF, Jeger FB, Lussi A, Bornstein MM. Precision of endodontic working length measurements: a pilot investigation comparing cone-beam computed tomography scanning with standard measurement techniques. Journal of endodontics. 2011;37(8):1046-51.
Bhuva B, Barnes JJ, Patel S. The use of limited cone beam computed tomography in the diagnosis and management of a case of perforating internal root resorption. International endodontic journal. 2011;44(8):777-86.
Damstra J, Fourie Z, Huddleston Slater JJ, Ren Y. Accuracyof linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomography-derived surface models of different voxel sizes. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 2010;137(1):16.e1-6; discussion -7.
Yilmaz F, Kamburoglu K, Senel B. Endodontic Working Length Measurement Using Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Images Obtained at Different Voxel Sizes and Field of Views, Periapical Radiography, and Apex Locator: A Comparative Ex Vivo Study. Journal of endodontics. 2017;43(1):152-6.
Wenzel A, Haiter-Neto F, Frydenberg M, Kirkevang LL. Variable-resolution cone-beam computerized tomography with enhancement filtrationcompared with intraoral photostimulable phosphor radiography in detection of transverse root fractures in an in vitro model. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics. 2009;108(6):939-45.
Sherrard JF, Rossouw PE, Benson BW, Carrillo R, Buschang PH. Accuracy and reliability of tooth and root lengths measured on cone-beam computed tomographs. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 2010;137(4 Suppl):S100-8.
Parrone MT, Bechara B, Deahl ST, 2nd, Ruparel NB, Katkar R, Noujeim M. Cone beam computed tomography image optimization to detect root fractures in endodontically treated teeth: an in vitro (phantom) study. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology. 2017;123(5):613-20.
- Abstract Viewed: 321 times
- PDF Downloaded: 77 times