Maria Soledad Mareque-Bueno DDS, Venkateshbabu Nagendrababu PhD, Paul M.H. Dummer PhD, Manuel Ruíz-Piñón PhD, Teresa Arias-Moliz PhD, David Uroz-Torres PhD, Sara Garrido-Parada DDS, Benjamín Martín-Biedma PhD, Pablo Castelo-Baz PhD
{"title":"一项回顾性临床研究,比较锥形束计算机断层扫描图像和根尖周X光片显示牙齿裂缝、牙齿劈裂和牙齿根部垂直骨折的能力。","authors":"Maria Soledad Mareque-Bueno DDS, Venkateshbabu Nagendrababu PhD, Paul M.H. Dummer PhD, Manuel Ruíz-Piñón PhD, Teresa Arias-Moliz PhD, David Uroz-Torres PhD, Sara Garrido-Parada DDS, Benjamín Martín-Biedma PhD, Pablo Castelo-Baz PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.adaj.2024.04.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This retrospective clinical study aimed to compare the sensitivity of cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images and periapical (PA) radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures (VRFs).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The authors included 98 patients (98 teeth) diagnosed with a longitudinal tooth fracture (LTF) (cracked tooth, split tooth, VRF) through direct visualization after extraction and with comprehensive clinical and radiographic records. They collected demographic, clinical, and radiographic data. The authors evaluated PA radiographs and CBCT images to identify fractures, fracture lines, and the different patterns of bone loss associated with these teeth. They used the McNemar test to compare PA radiographs and CBCT scans when assessing bone loss. They used the Fisher test to determine statistical relationships between fracture types and demographic, clinical, and radiologic traits. They used an analysis of variance test to compare patient age with fracture types.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>CBCT images were significantly more effective (<em>P</em> < .05) in detecting bone loss patterns associated with LTFs than with PA radiographs, with 71% of cases detected via CBCT images compared with 42% via radiographs. Mean age was significantly greater (<em>P</em> < .05) in patients with teeth with VRFs than in patients with split teeth. A significant relationship was observed between the type of fracture and the following variables: root canal treatment (split, VRF, <em>P</em> = .002), deep probing depth (≥ 5 mm) (VRF, <em>P</em> = .026), and having more than 8 teeth extracted from the mouth (VRF, <em>P</em> = .032). Overall, there was a significant difference (<em>P</em> < .001) between the visualization of fracture lines (45% on PA radiographs, 65% on CBCT images).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>CBCT scans provided more information on LTFs than PA radiographs, particularly in the identification of periradicular bone changes.</p></div><div><h3>Practical Implications</h3><p>CBCT imaging can assist in making the clinical diagnosis of LTFs through observation of bone loss patterns, providing more information than PA radiographs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Dental Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A retrospective clinical study to compare the ability of cone-beam computed tomographic images and periapical radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures\",\"authors\":\"Maria Soledad Mareque-Bueno DDS, Venkateshbabu Nagendrababu PhD, Paul M.H. Dummer PhD, Manuel Ruíz-Piñón PhD, Teresa Arias-Moliz PhD, David Uroz-Torres PhD, Sara Garrido-Parada DDS, Benjamín Martín-Biedma PhD, Pablo Castelo-Baz PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.adaj.2024.04.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This retrospective clinical study aimed to compare the sensitivity of cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images and periapical (PA) radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures (VRFs).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The authors included 98 patients (98 teeth) diagnosed with a longitudinal tooth fracture (LTF) (cracked tooth, split tooth, VRF) through direct visualization after extraction and with comprehensive clinical and radiographic records. They collected demographic, clinical, and radiographic data. The authors evaluated PA radiographs and CBCT images to identify fractures, fracture lines, and the different patterns of bone loss associated with these teeth. They used the McNemar test to compare PA radiographs and CBCT scans when assessing bone loss. They used the Fisher test to determine statistical relationships between fracture types and demographic, clinical, and radiologic traits. They used an analysis of variance test to compare patient age with fracture types.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>CBCT images were significantly more effective (<em>P</em> < .05) in detecting bone loss patterns associated with LTFs than with PA radiographs, with 71% of cases detected via CBCT images compared with 42% via radiographs. Mean age was significantly greater (<em>P</em> < .05) in patients with teeth with VRFs than in patients with split teeth. A significant relationship was observed between the type of fracture and the following variables: root canal treatment (split, VRF, <em>P</em> = .002), deep probing depth (≥ 5 mm) (VRF, <em>P</em> = .026), and having more than 8 teeth extracted from the mouth (VRF, <em>P</em> = .032). Overall, there was a significant difference (<em>P</em> < .001) between the visualization of fracture lines (45% on PA radiographs, 65% on CBCT images).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>CBCT scans provided more information on LTFs than PA radiographs, particularly in the identification of periradicular bone changes.</p></div><div><h3>Practical Implications</h3><p>CBCT imaging can assist in making the clinical diagnosis of LTFs through observation of bone loss patterns, providing more information than PA radiographs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Dental Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Dental Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002817724002125\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Dental Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002817724002125","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:这项回顾性临床研究旨在比较锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像和根尖周(PA)X光片对发现裂纹牙、劈裂牙和垂直根折(VRF)牙的敏感性:作者纳入了 98 名患者(98 颗牙齿),这些患者在拔牙后通过直接观察被诊断为纵向牙折(LTF)(裂牙、劈裂牙、VRF),并有全面的临床和放射记录。他们收集了人口统计学、临床和放射学数据。作者评估了 PA X 光片和 CBCT 图像,以确定与这些牙齿相关的骨折、骨折线和不同的骨质流失模式。在评估骨质流失时,他们使用 McNemar 检验来比较 PA X 光片和 CBCT 扫描。他们使用费雪检验来确定骨折类型与人口统计学、临床和放射学特征之间的统计关系。他们使用方差分析检验比较了患者年龄与骨折类型:CBCT图像在检测与LTF相关的骨质流失模式方面明显比PA射线照片更有效(P < .05),通过CBCT图像检测出的病例占71%,而通过射线照片检测出的病例占42%。有 VRFs 牙齿的患者的平均年龄明显大于有分叉牙齿的患者(P < .05)。骨折类型与以下变量之间存在明显关系:根管治疗(劈裂、VRF,P = .002)、探查深度深(≥ 5 mm)(VRF,P = .026)、口腔中拔牙超过 8 颗(VRF,P = .032)。总体而言,骨折线的可视化程度存在显著差异(P < .001)(PA X 光片上为 45%,CBCT 图像上为 65%):结论:CBCT 扫描比 PA X 光片提供了更多关于 LTF 的信息,尤其是在识别关节周围骨质变化方面:实际意义:CBCT 成像可通过观察骨质流失模式协助临床诊断 LTF,提供比 PA X 光片更多的信息。
A retrospective clinical study to compare the ability of cone-beam computed tomographic images and periapical radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures
Background
This retrospective clinical study aimed to compare the sensitivity of cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images and periapical (PA) radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures (VRFs).
Methods
The authors included 98 patients (98 teeth) diagnosed with a longitudinal tooth fracture (LTF) (cracked tooth, split tooth, VRF) through direct visualization after extraction and with comprehensive clinical and radiographic records. They collected demographic, clinical, and radiographic data. The authors evaluated PA radiographs and CBCT images to identify fractures, fracture lines, and the different patterns of bone loss associated with these teeth. They used the McNemar test to compare PA radiographs and CBCT scans when assessing bone loss. They used the Fisher test to determine statistical relationships between fracture types and demographic, clinical, and radiologic traits. They used an analysis of variance test to compare patient age with fracture types.
Results
CBCT images were significantly more effective (P < .05) in detecting bone loss patterns associated with LTFs than with PA radiographs, with 71% of cases detected via CBCT images compared with 42% via radiographs. Mean age was significantly greater (P < .05) in patients with teeth with VRFs than in patients with split teeth. A significant relationship was observed between the type of fracture and the following variables: root canal treatment (split, VRF, P = .002), deep probing depth (≥ 5 mm) (VRF, P = .026), and having more than 8 teeth extracted from the mouth (VRF, P = .032). Overall, there was a significant difference (P < .001) between the visualization of fracture lines (45% on PA radiographs, 65% on CBCT images).
Conclusions
CBCT scans provided more information on LTFs than PA radiographs, particularly in the identification of periradicular bone changes.
Practical Implications
CBCT imaging can assist in making the clinical diagnosis of LTFs through observation of bone loss patterns, providing more information than PA radiographs.
期刊介绍:
There is not a single source or solution to help dentists in their quest for lifelong learning, improving dental practice, and dental well-being. JADA+, along with The Journal of the American Dental Association, is striving to do just that, bringing together practical content covering dentistry topics and procedures to help dentists—both general dentists and specialists—provide better patient care and improve oral health and well-being. This is a work in progress; as we add more content, covering more topics of interest, it will continue to expand, becoming an ever-more essential source of oral health knowledge.