In vitro comparison of cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes for detection of simulated external root resorption

The present study compared the efficacy of cone beam computed tomography using different voxel sizes in the diagnosis of simulated external root resorption. The presence or absence of simulated defects on buccal, mesial and distal root surfaces of 20 premolars was evaluated. The defects were small (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Oral Science Vol. 54; no. 3; pp. 219 - 225
Main Authors: Neves, Frederico S., Freitas, Deborah Q. de, Campos, Paulo S. F., Almeida, Solange M. de, Haiter-Neto, Francisco
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Japan Nihon University School of Dentistry 01-09-2012
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The present study compared the efficacy of cone beam computed tomography using different voxel sizes in the diagnosis of simulated external root resorption. The presence or absence of simulated defects on buccal, mesial and distal root surfaces of 20 premolars was evaluated. The defects were small (0.26 mm in diameter and 0.08 mm deep), medium (0.62 mm in diameter and 0.19 mm deep) and large (1.05 mm in diameter and 0.24 mm deep), equally distributed on each root surface. Images were obtained using Classic i-CAT cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes: 0.12, 0.20, 0.25 and 0.30 mm. Five oral radiologists evaluated the images. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were determined. The sensitivity decreased and specificity increased as voxel size increased. Accuracy values were the highest for the smallest voxel size (0.12 mm). The results for voxel sizes 0.20 mm and 0.25 mm were similar. Positive and negative predictive values were similar in all protocols, except with 0.30 mm, in which they were the lowest. In conclusion, external root resorption was more easily diagnosed when a smaller voxel size was used. (J Oral Sci 54, 219-225, 2012)
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1343-4934
1880-4926
DOI:10.2334/josnusd.54.219