4.1 Article

Diagnostic accuracy of digitized periapical radiographs validated against micro-computed tomography scanning in evaluating orthodontically induced apical root resorption

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES
卷 116, 期 5, 页码 467-472

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00559.x

关键词

apical root resorption; digitized periapical radiographs; micro-CT scanner; orthodontic movement

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [3200-06480.01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to validate the use of digitized periapical radiographs in evaluating orthodontically induced apical root resorption against micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) scanning as a criterion standard test. In a standardized experimental protocol, 29 premolars in 16 subjects were tipped buccally for 8 wk. Nineteen contralateral premolars not subjected to orthodontic movement served as controls. Standardized periapical radiographs were taken before and after the experimental period (Rx method). These teeth were extracted and scanned using a micro-CT technique with a 9 mu m resolution. Two calibrated examiners assessed blindly the presence or absence of apical root resorption on digitized radiographs and three-dimensional reconstructions of the scans. Significant differences were detected between the orthodontically moved teeth and controls: 86% of the orthodontically moved teeth and 21% of the control teeth showed apical root resorption when using micro-CT as a validation method. A total of 55% of the experimental teeth and 5% of the control teeth showed resorption when assessed using Rx method. The Rx method showed a specificity of 78% and a sensitivity of 44%, which means that less than half of the cases with root resorption identified using a CT scanner were identified by radiography. Nearly all the orthodontically moved teeth showed apical root resorption. Apical root resorption may be underestimated when evaluated using digitized periapical radiographs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据