OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to find out the incidence of incidental findings seen in cone beam computed tomography scans taken for orthodontic purposes and to see if these findings influence orthodontic treatment. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Three hundred and twenty-nine consecutive scans carried out for orthodontic purposes using an i-CAT Classic were included in the study. Each scan was evaluated by a single radiologist and any incidental findings recorded. The incidental findings were further classified depending on whether the finding would influence orthodontic management. RESULTS: There were a total of 370 incidental findings in the 329 scans, with at least one incidental finding in 66% of patients. The most common incidental findings were dental (n = 120) and included retained deciduous roots (n = 24) and periapical disease (n = 15). Of the incidental findings 200 required no follow-up. A total of 168 findings required follow-up, but the overall orthodontic treatment plan was not altered. Only two findings were significant in that the orthodontic treatment was amended in light of the incidental finding. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental findings are very common on CBCT. However the majority of these findings do not affect orthodontic treatment planning.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to find out the incidence of incidental findings seen in cone beam computed tomography scans taken for orthodontic purposes and to see if these findings influence orthodontic treatment. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Three hundred and twenty-nine consecutive scans carried out for orthodontic purposes using an i-CAT Classic were included in the study. Each scan was evaluated by a single radiologist and any incidental findings recorded. The incidental findings were further classified depending on whether the finding would influence orthodontic management. RESULTS: There were a total of 370 incidental findings in the 329 scans, with at least one incidental finding in 66% of patients. The most common incidental findings were dental (n = 120) and included retained deciduous roots (n = 24) and periapical disease (n = 15). Of the incidental findings 200 required no follow-up. A total of 168 findings required follow-up, but the overall orthodontic treatment plan was not altered. Only two findings were significant in that the orthodontic treatment was amended in light of the incidental finding. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental findings are very common on CBCT. However the majority of these findings do not affect orthodontic treatment planning.
Authors: Ivna A Lopes; Rosana M A Tucunduva; Roberta H Handem; Ana Lucia A Capelozza Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 2.419