Comparison of Accuracy of Digital Periapical Radiography with Digital Bitewing in Evaluation of Bone Resorption in Posterior Teeth

E. Rafiei, E. Safari, R. Ghaffari
{"title":"Comparison of Accuracy of Digital Periapical Radiography with Digital Bitewing in Evaluation of Bone Resorption in Posterior Teeth","authors":"E. Rafiei, E. Safari, R. Ghaffari","doi":"10.18502/IJDS.V17I1.5918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Radiography is a valuable adjunct to the diagnosis of periodontal disease. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of two periapical radiographic and digital biting techniques in assessing bone resorption in posterior teeth of patients with chronic periodontitis. \nMaterials and Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was performed on 36 samples of interproximal surfaces of posterior teeth in patients with chronic periodontitis, candidate of flap surgery referring to the department of periodontitis, faculty of dentistry, Islamic Azad University of Isfahan (Khorasgan) in 2015. First two methods of imaging include periapical and digital bitewing were performed and the necessary distances were measured by a radiologist. Then, during surgery, and before the bone contour correction, the distance from the reference point to the alveolar bone shaft (gold standard) was measured by a Williams probe. Data were analyzed using Paired t-test. (α = 0.05). \nResult: Out of 36 specimens, respectively in bitewing and periapical radiographs 2 and 1 cases were equal with clinical and in 16 (44.4%) and 20 (55.6%) distances were more. The average difference of amount of bone resorption in bitewing was 0.2 ± 0.12 mm and there was no significant difference between estimated mean value (p value = 0.01). Average difference of amount of bone resorption in periapical to clinical method was 0.87 ± 0.26 it was significant difference (p value = 0.001). \nConclusion: According to result, the use of bitewing radiography to determine the rate of bone resorption in posterior teeth is preferable to periapical radiography.","PeriodicalId":221865,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Isfahan Dental School","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Isfahan Dental School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/IJDS.V17I1.5918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Radiography is a valuable adjunct to the diagnosis of periodontal disease. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of two periapical radiographic and digital biting techniques in assessing bone resorption in posterior teeth of patients with chronic periodontitis. Materials and Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was performed on 36 samples of interproximal surfaces of posterior teeth in patients with chronic periodontitis, candidate of flap surgery referring to the department of periodontitis, faculty of dentistry, Islamic Azad University of Isfahan (Khorasgan) in 2015. First two methods of imaging include periapical and digital bitewing were performed and the necessary distances were measured by a radiologist. Then, during surgery, and before the bone contour correction, the distance from the reference point to the alveolar bone shaft (gold standard) was measured by a Williams probe. Data were analyzed using Paired t-test. (α = 0.05). Result: Out of 36 specimens, respectively in bitewing and periapical radiographs 2 and 1 cases were equal with clinical and in 16 (44.4%) and 20 (55.6%) distances were more. The average difference of amount of bone resorption in bitewing was 0.2 ± 0.12 mm and there was no significant difference between estimated mean value (p value = 0.01). Average difference of amount of bone resorption in periapical to clinical method was 0.87 ± 0.26 it was significant difference (p value = 0.001). Conclusion: According to result, the use of bitewing radiography to determine the rate of bone resorption in posterior teeth is preferable to periapical radiography.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字尖周x线摄影与数字咬翼评价后牙骨吸收的准确性比较
简介:放射摄影是诊断牙周病的一种有价值的辅助手段。本研究旨在比较两种根尖周x线摄影和数字咬合技术在评估慢性牙周炎患者后牙骨吸收方面的准确性。材料与方法:本研究对2015年伊斯法罕伊斯兰阿扎德大学(霍拉斯甘)牙周炎系牙周炎系皮瓣手术候诊慢性牙周炎患者后牙近端间面36例样本进行描述性分析研究。前两种成像方法包括根尖周和数字咬牙,并由放射科医生测量必要的距离。然后,在手术期间和骨轮廓矫正之前,用Williams探头测量从参考点到牙槽骨轴(金标准)的距离。数据分析采用配对t检验。(α = 0.05)。结果:36例标本中,咬牙片和根尖周片分别有2例和1例与临床吻合,有16例(44.4%)和20例(55.6%)与临床吻合。咬翼骨吸收量的平均差异为0.2±0.12 mm,与估计平均值无显著差异(p值= 0.01)。根尖周法与临床法的平均骨吸收量差异为0.87±0.26,差异有统计学意义(p值= 0.001)。结论:根据结果,采用咬翼x线片测定后牙骨吸收率优于根尖周x线片。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Investigation of Morphological Variations of Canal and Root of First Mandibular Molar in Tomographic Images Computer with Cone Beam in Patients of Arak City Treatment of Severe Anterior Open-bite Accompany with Impacted Canine: A Case Report The Ability of Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Periodontal Tissue Regeneration: A Comprehensive Review of Literature Immunohistochemical Expression of Alpha Smooth Muscle Actin Positive Myofibroblast and Laminin 5 gamma 2 in Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Verrucous Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity Evaluation of the Relationship between rs17561 and rs1143634 Genetic Polymorphisms and the Risk of Chronic Periodontitis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1