Literature DB >> 22868296

Proximal caries detection accuracy using intraoral bitewing radiography, extraoral bitewing radiography and panoramic radiography.

K Kamburoglu1, E Kolsuz, S Murat, S Yüksel, T Ozen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare proximal caries detection using intraoral bitewing, extraoral bitewing and panoramic radiography.
METHODS: 80 extracted human premolar and molar teeth with and without proximal caries were used. Intraoral radiographs were taken with Kodak Insight film (Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY) using the bitewing technique. Extraoral bitewing and panoramic images were obtained using a Planmeca Promax Digital Panoramic X-ray unit (Planmeca Inc., Helsinki, Finland). Images were evaluated by three observers twice. In total, 160 proximal surfaces were assessed. Intra- and interobserver kappa coefficients were calculated. Scores obtained from the three techniques were compared with the histological gold standard using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Az values for each image type, observer and reading were compared using z-tests, with a significance level of α = 0.05.
RESULTS: Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.883 to 0.963 for the intraoral bitewing, from 0.715 to 0.893 for the extraoral bitewing, and from 0.659 to 0.884 for the panoramic radiography. Interobserver agreements for the first and second readings for the intraoral bitewing images were between 0.717 and 0.780, the extraoral bitewing readings were between 0.569 and 0.707, and the panoramic images were between 0.477 and 0.740. The Az values for both readings of all three observers were highest for the intraoral bitewing. Az values for the extraoral bitewing images were higher than those of the panoramic images without statistical significance (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Intraoral bitewing radiography was superior to extraoral bitewing and panoramic radiography in diagnosing proximal caries of premolar and molar teeth ex vivo. Similar intra- and interobserver coefficients were calculated for extraoral bitewing and panoramic radiography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22868296      PMCID: PMC3520392          DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/30526171

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol        ISSN: 0250-832X            Impact factor:   2.419


  21 in total

1.  Subjective image quality of digital panoramic radiographs displayed on monitor and printed on various hardcopy media.

Authors:  Frieda Gijbels; Gerard Sanderink; Herman Pauwels; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-12-02       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 2.  Bitewing and digital bitewing radiography for detection of caries lesions.

Authors:  A Wenzel
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.116

3.  Accuracy of digital panoramic images displayed on monitor, glossy paper, and film for assessment of mandibular third molars.

Authors:  Ingibjörg S Benediktsdóttir; Ann Wenzel
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2004-08

Review 4.  A reappraisal of the value of the bitewing radiograph in the diagnosis of posterior approximal caries.

Authors:  E A Kidd; N B Pitts
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  1990-10-06       Impact factor: 1.626

5.  Pre-clinical evaluation of a new dental panoramic radiographic system based on tomosynthesis method.

Authors:  M Noujeim; T Prihoda; W D McDavid; K Ogawa; T Yamakawa; K Seki; T Okano; T Sue; R P Langlais
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  A diagnostic comparison of panoramic and intraoral radiographs.

Authors:  D J Flint; E Paunovich; W S Moore; D T Wofford; C B Hermesch
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  1998-06

7.  A comparison between bitewing radiographs taken with rectangular and circular collimators in UK military dental practices: a retrospective study.

Authors:  L A Parrott; S Y Ng
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  Interpretation of bitewing radiographs. Part 2. Evaluation of the size of approximal lesions and need for treatment.

Authors:  E I Weiss; A Tzohar; I Kaffe; M M Littner; I Gelernter; I Eli
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Interpretation of bitewing radiographs. Part 1. Evaluation of the presence of approximal lesions.

Authors:  I Eli; E I Weiss; A Tzohar; M M Littner; I Gelernter; I Kaffe
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Accuracy of radiographic caries diagnosis at different kilovoltages and two film speeds.

Authors:  B Svenson; H G Gröndahl; A Petersson; A Olving
Journal:  Swed Dent J       Date:  1985
View more
  25 in total

1.  Ex vivo evaluation of new 2D and 3D dental radiographic technology for detecting caries.

Authors:  Laurence Gaalaas; Donald Tyndall; André Mol; Eric T Everett; Ananta Bangdiwala
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  A clinical comparison of extraoral panoramic and intraoral radiographic modalities for detecting proximal caries and visualizing open posterior interproximal contacts.

Authors:  Glenn L Terry; Marcel Noujeim; Robert P Langlais; William S Moore; Thomas J Prihoda
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  Comparison of diagnostic effects of infrared imaging and bitewing radiography in proximal caries of permanent teeth.

Authors:  Arghavan Tonkaboni; Aida Saffarpour; Ferial Aghapourzangeneh; Mohammad Javad Kharazi Fard
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 3.161

4.  Study of edge detection task in dental panoramic radiographs.

Authors:  L Gráfová; M Kasparová; S Kakawand; A Procházka; T Dostálová
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Intraoral versus extraoral bitewing radiography in detection of enamel proximal caries: an ex vivo study.

Authors:  Walaa Hussein Abu El-Ela; Mary Medhat Farid; Mostafa Saad El-Din Mostafa
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  'Non-standard' panoramic programmes and the unusual artefacts they produce.

Authors:  S Harvey; F Ball; J Brown; B Thomas
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 1.626

7.  Does dental caries affect dental development in children and adolescents?

Authors:  Brunilda Dhamo; Besiana Elezi; Lea Kragt; Eppo B Wolvius; Edwin M Ongkosuwito
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2018-05-20       Impact factor: 3.363

8.  Application of panoramic radiography with a multilayer imaging program for detecting proximal caries: a preliminary clinical study.

Authors:  Kug Jin Jeon; Sang-Sun Han; Chena Lee; Yoon Joo Choi; Hoi In Jung; Young Hyun Kim
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.419

9.  In vitro comparison of high-definition US, CBCT and periapical radiography in the diagnosis of proximal and recurrent caries.

Authors:  Oya Şeker; Kıvanç Kamburoğlu; Cihan Şahin; Nejlan Eratam; Esra Ece Çakmak; Gül Sönmez; Doğukan Özen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 2.419

10.  Community water fluoridation exposure and dental caries experience in newly enrolled members of the Canadian Armed Forces 2006-2017.

Authors:  Constantine Batsos; Randy Boyes; Alyson Mahar
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2021-01-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.