Kivanç Kamburoğlu1, Igor Tsesis, Anda Kfir, Israel Kaffe. 1. Department of Oral Pathology and Oral Medicine, Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. dtkivo@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare diagnosis of artificially induced external root resorption cavities using conventional intraoral film radiography (Kodak Insight), CCD sensor (Sopix wireless) and PSP sensor (Orex Digident). STUDY DESIGN: Two mandibles were obtained from cadavers and teeth extracted from their alveolus. Artificial external root resorptions were simulated using ISO 0.5 mm, 0.8 mm, and 1.2 mm diameter round burs by drilling to the entire depth in different locations at the cervical, middle, and apical thirds of the proximal and buccal root surfaces of 6 teeth in increasing order. Conventional and digital radiographs were obtained from 3 different views of each tooth in 3 steps (small = 0.5 mm; medium = 0.8 mm; and large = 1.2 mm diameter round burs). Three observers examined all images for the presence of resorption cavities. In the first session, each image was evaluated separately; in the second, examiners had access to all views. Data were statistically analyzed using 4-way analysis of variance. Pair-wise comparison between receptors, projection views, size, and location were made by Tukey test. RESULTS: Higher proportions of correct readings were obtained with the conventional film (Kodak Insight) and CCD receptor compared with the PSP receptor used in this study (PSP < CCD <or= Film; P < .001). Best results were obtained when examiners had access to all views. Most difficult locations in determining true diagnosis were the apical regions. Highest correct readings were obtained at the proximal cervical regions. CONCLUSION: Conventional intraoral film and CCD sensor produced similar results in diagnosing simulated external root resorption.
OBJECTIVE: To compare diagnosis of artificially induced external root resorption cavities using conventional intraoral film radiography (Kodak Insight), CCD sensor (Sopix wireless) and PSP sensor (Orex Digident). STUDY DESIGN: Two mandibles were obtained from cadavers and teeth extracted from their alveolus. Artificial external root resorptions were simulated using ISO 0.5 mm, 0.8 mm, and 1.2 mm diameter round burs by drilling to the entire depth in different locations at the cervical, middle, and apical thirds of the proximal and buccal root surfaces of 6 teeth in increasing order. Conventional and digital radiographs were obtained from 3 different views of each tooth in 3 steps (small = 0.5 mm; medium = 0.8 mm; and large = 1.2 mm diameter round burs). Three observers examined all images for the presence of resorption cavities. In the first session, each image was evaluated separately; in the second, examiners had access to all views. Data were statistically analyzed using 4-way analysis of variance. Pair-wise comparison between receptors, projection views, size, and location were made by Tukey test. RESULTS: Higher proportions of correct readings were obtained with the conventional film (Kodak Insight) and CCD receptor compared with the PSP receptor used in this study (PSP < CCD <or= Film; P < .001). Best results were obtained when examiners had access to all views. Most difficult locations in determining true diagnosis were the apical regions. Highest correct readings were obtained at the proximal cervical regions. CONCLUSION: Conventional intraoral film and CCD sensor produced similar results in diagnosing simulated external root resorption.