OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of vertical root fracture (VRF) detection using three tomography devices and two software systems in teeth with different endodontic fillings. METHODS: The sample consisted of 45 premolars divided into 3 groups: No filling (NF, n=15); Gutta percha (GP, n=15) and Metallic Post (MP, n=15). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were acquired in Kodak 9000 3D, Orthopantomography 300 (OP300) and PreXion 3D devices, before and after induced root fractures. Two oral radiologists analyzed all images using InVivoDental and e-Vol DX software systems. The analysis was repeated after 15 days in 30% of the sample. Data analysis compared receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, as well the areas under the ROC curves. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value were calculated according to each tomographic device and software. Intra- and interexaminer reliability were tested using the Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The highest accuracy was seen in the image set from the PreXion 3D, using InVivo (0.96) or e-Vol DX (0.92) in image analysis. The OP300 device presented a similar performance of the PreXion 3D in teeth with different endodontic fillings. When using e-Vol DX, the accuracy of Kodak 9000 3D improved from 0.62 to 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: The PreXion 3D device is the most accurate when detecting VRF, with a performance similar to the OP300 in endodontic filled teeth. Kodak 9000 3D is indicated for teeth without fillings, with better accuracy using e-Vol DX software.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of vertical root fracture (VRF) detection using three tomography devices and two software systems in teeth with different endodontic fillings. METHODS: The sample consisted of 45 premolars divided into 3 groups: No filling (NF, n=15); Gutta percha (GP, n=15) and Metallic Post (MP, n=15). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were acquired in Kodak 9000 3D, Orthopantomography 300 (OP300) and PreXion 3D devices, before and after induced root fractures. Two oral radiologists analyzed all images using InVivoDental and e-Vol DX software systems. The analysis was repeated after 15 days in 30% of the sample. Data analysis compared receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, as well the areas under the ROC curves. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value were calculated according to each tomographic device and software. Intra- and interexaminer reliability were tested using the Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The highest accuracy was seen in the image set from the PreXion 3D, using InVivo (0.96) or e-Vol DX (0.92) in image analysis. The OP300 device presented a similar performance of the PreXion 3D in teeth with different endodontic fillings. When using e-Vol DX, the accuracy of Kodak 9000 3D improved from 0.62 to 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: The PreXion 3D device is the most accurate when detecting VRF, with a performance similar to the OP300 in endodontic filled teeth. Kodak 9000 3D is indicated for teeth without fillings, with better accuracy using e-Vol DX software.
Authors: Carlos José Soares; Eliane Cristina Gava Pizi; Rodrigo Borges Fonseca; Luis Roberto Marcondes Martins Journal: Braz Oral Res Date: 2005 Jan-Mar
Authors: Ricardo Affonso Bernardes; Ivaldo Gomes de Moraes; Marco Antonio Húngaro Duarte; Bruno C Azevedo; José Ribamar de Azevedo; Clovis Monteiro Bramante Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2009-03-09
Authors: Turki M Baageel; Emad Habib Allah; Ghaida T Bakalka; Fatima Jadu; Ibrahim Yamany; Ahmed M Jan; Dania F Bogari; Turki Y Alhazzazi Journal: J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Date: 2016-08