Accuracy of three diagnostic tests to detect tooth resorption in unowned unsocialised cats in Denmark
Objectives To estimate the relative diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of oral clinical examination, full‐mouth dental radiography, and cone‐beam CT for the detection of tooth resorption in cats, and to estimate the prevalence of tooth resorption in unowned, unsocialised cats in Denmark. Materia...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of small animal practice Vol. 65; no. 6; pp. 387 - 393 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Oxford, UK
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01-06-2024
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Objectives
To estimate the relative diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of oral clinical examination, full‐mouth dental radiography, and cone‐beam CT for the detection of tooth resorption in cats, and to estimate the prevalence of tooth resorption in unowned, unsocialised cats in Denmark.
Materials and Methods
Cadavers of 144 adult cats underwent an oral examination, full‐mouth dental radiography, and cone‐beam CT. Sensitivity and specificity of the three tests, along with the true prevalence, overall and stratified by sex and tooth location, were estimated using latent class methods.
Results
We found cone‐beam CT to be the superior image modality, with a sensitivity of 99.5% and a specificity of 99.8%. Dental radiography had a sensitivity of 78.9% and a specificity of 100%, and oral clinical examination had a sensitivity of only 36.0% and specificity of 99.9%. We estimated the prevalence of tooth resorption among unowned unsocialised cats in Denmark to be 40% of adult individuals, and 6.1% of teeth.
Clinical Significance
When dealing with tooth resorption, cone‐beam CT can help the operator to find and treat affected teeth that could otherwise go undiagnosed. The prevalence of tooth resorption among unowned, unsocialised cats in Denmark does not appear to differ from other populations of cats. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0022-4510 1748-5827 1748-5827 |
DOI: | 10.1111/jsap.13703 |