Ismail Davut Capar1, Huseyin Ertas2, Hakan Arslan3, Elif Tarim Ertas4. 1. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Turkey. Electronic address: capardt@hotmail.com. 2. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Turkey. 3. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey. 4. Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Diagnosis and Radiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Turkey.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the presence, characteristics, and type of dens invaginatus (DI) by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic images rendered from CBCT images. In addition, the findings of the imaging techniques were compared. METHODS: We evaluated 300 CBCT images to determine the type of DI, the presence of an impacted tooth near the DI, and the presence of apical pathosis. The McNemar test was used to compare the prevalence of DI according to CBCT and panoramic images rendered from CBCT images. RESULTS: The presence of DI was lower on panoramic images rendered from CBCT images (3% of the patients) compared with on CBCT images (10.7% of the patients) (P < .001). According to the CBCT images, the distribution of teeth with DI was as follows: maxillary lateral incisors (75%), maxillary central incisors (6.8%), mandibular premolars (4.6%), mesiodens (9%), maxillary canines (2.3%), and mandibular canines (2.3%). Type I DI was the most commonly observed type of invaginatus (65.9%), followed by type II (29.5%) and type III (4.6%). All patients with type III DI and 25% of the patients with type II DI had apical pathosis at the time of referral, but periapical lesions were not observed in teeth with type I DI. In total, 13.6% of DI cases had impacted teeth. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT can be recommended as an effective diagnostic device for identifying DI because it provides an accurate representation of the external and internal dental anatomy.
INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the presence, characteristics, and type of dens invaginatus (DI) by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic images rendered from CBCT images. In addition, the findings of the imaging techniques were compared. METHODS: We evaluated 300 CBCT images to determine the type of DI, the presence of an impacted tooth near the DI, and the presence of apical pathosis. The McNemar test was used to compare the prevalence of DI according to CBCT and panoramic images rendered from CBCT images. RESULTS: The presence of DI was lower on panoramic images rendered from CBCT images (3% of the patients) compared with on CBCT images (10.7% of the patients) (P < .001). According to the CBCT images, the distribution of teeth with DI was as follows: maxillary lateral incisors (75%), maxillary central incisors (6.8%), mandibular premolars (4.6%), mesiodens (9%), maxillary canines (2.3%), and mandibular canines (2.3%). Type I DI was the most commonly observed type of invaginatus (65.9%), followed by type II (29.5%) and type III (4.6%). All patients with type III DI and 25% of the patients with type II DI had apical pathosis at the time of referral, but periapical lesions were not observed in teeth with type I DI. In total, 13.6% of DI cases had impacted teeth. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT can be recommended as an effective diagnostic device for identifying DI because it provides an accurate representation of the external and internal dental anatomy.