| Literature DB >> 29042732 |
Shyam Padmanabhan1, Ahila Dommy1, Sanjeela R Guru1, Ajesh Joseph2.
Abstract
AIM: Periodontists frequently experience inconvenience in accurate assessment and treatment of furcation areas affected by periodontal disease. Furcation involvement (FI) most commonly affects the mandibular molars. Diagnosis of furcation-involved teeth is mainly by the assessment of probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, furcation entrance probing, and intraoral periapical radiographs. Three-dimensional imaging has provided advantage to the clinician in assessment of bone morphology. Thus, the present study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as against direct intrasurgical measurements of furcation defects in mandibular molars. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Study population included 14 patients with 25 mandibular molar furcation sites. CBCT was performed to measure height, width, and depth of furcation defects of mandibular molars with Grade II and Grade III FI. Intrasurgical measurements of the FI were assessed during periodontal flap surgery in indicated teeth which were compared with CBCT measurements. Statistical analysis was done using paired t-test and Bland-Altman plot.Entities:
Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; diagnostic imaging; furcation defects; periodontitis
Year: 2017 PMID: 29042732 PMCID: PMC5644004 DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_515_17
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contemp Clin Dent ISSN: 0976-2361
Figure 1Measurement of furcation height, width, and depth by cone beam computed tomography (a and b) and direct surgical measurements (c and d) using digital vernier caliper (e and f)
Cone-beam computed tomography versus intrasurgical measurements for 25 mandibular molar furcation sites
Comparison between cone-beam computed tomography and direct surgical measurements with respect to furcation height, width, and depth
Distribution of the patients based on deviations between cone beam computed tomography method and intrasurgical method in measuring the furcation height, width, and depth
Figure 2Agreement level between cone beam computed tomography measurements and intrasurgical measurements using Bland–Altman plot for furcation height (a), furcation width (b), and furcation depth (c)