OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of field of view (FOV) size, scanning position within the FOV and scanning mode on the detection of root fracture and artifact perception. METHODS: Forty single-rooted premolars restored with NiCr and AgPd posts were divided into two groups: fractured and sound. All teeth were scanned using four CBCT scanning protocols varying FOV sizes (80 × 80 mm and 50 × 55 mm) and scanning modes (Standard and High Definition). The sample was positioned within the FOV in two pre-set positions (central and lateral) and in four positions established by the operator (quadrants). Detection of root fracture and artifact perception were assessed by two observers using 5-point and 4-point scales. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC values were calculated and compared by ANOVA two-way and Tukey's test. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used to assess artifact perception. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The central position within the FOV presented higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC values and differed from the lateral position within the FOV for the studied metal posts (p<0.05). Quadrant 2 presented the best sensitivity, accuracy, and AUC values (p<0.05). The lateral position within the FOV, AgPd posts, quadrants 1 and 3 and protocols 1 (SM, 80 × 80) and 2 (HD, 80× 80) presented higher frequency of artifacts classified as "severe". CONCLUSION: Positioning the object in the center or closer to the anterior periphery of the FOV while using a small FOV improved the detection of root fracture and decreased artifact perception.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of field of view (FOV) size, scanning position within the FOV and scanning mode on the detection of root fracture and artifact perception. METHODS: Forty single-rooted premolars restored with NiCr and AgPd posts were divided into two groups: fractured and sound. All teeth were scanned using four CBCT scanning protocols varying FOV sizes (80 × 80 mm and 50 × 55 mm) and scanning modes (Standard and High Definition). The sample was positioned within the FOV in two pre-set positions (central and lateral) and in four positions established by the operator (quadrants). Detection of root fracture and artifact perception were assessed by two observers using 5-point and 4-point scales. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC values were calculated and compared by ANOVA two-way and Tukey's test. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used to assess artifact perception. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The central position within the FOV presented higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC values and differed from the lateral position within the FOV for the studied metal posts (p<0.05). Quadrant 2 presented the best sensitivity, accuracy, and AUC values (p<0.05). The lateral position within the FOV, AgPd posts, quadrants 1 and 3 and protocols 1 (SM, 80 × 80) and 2 (HD, 80× 80) presented higher frequency of artifacts classified as "severe". CONCLUSION: Positioning the object in the center or closer to the anterior periphery of the FOV while using a small FOV improved the detection of root fracture and decreased artifact perception.
Authors: A P Lira de Farias Freitas; Y W Cavalcanti; F C M Costa; L R Peixoto; A M A Maia; K Rovaris; P M Bento; D P Melo Journal: Int Endod J Date: 2018-09-14 Impact factor: 5.264
Authors: Bassam Hassan; Maria Elissavet Metska; Ahmet Rifat Ozok; Paul van der Stelt; Paul Rudolf Wesselink Journal: J Endod Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 4.171