Kehn E Yapp1, Patrick Brennan1, Ernest Ekpo1. 1. The University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Medical Image Optimisation and Perception Group, Discipline of Medical Imaging Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Australia.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the comparative diagnostic performance of digital periapical (PA) radiography and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging on endodontic disease detection and to provide study methodology and design recommendations for future studies comparing the diagnostic performance of imaging modalities on endodontic disease detection. Approach: A search of the Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was conducted. Studies that compared the performance of CBCT to digital PA radiography for detecting endodontic disease had an independent reference standard determining the presence of endodontic disease and conducted data analysis including either sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis or free response operating characteristic analysis were included. Of the 20,530 identified studies, only 3 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results: Most studies assessed for eligibility were excluded due to limitations and biases in study design-15 of 18 studies had no reference standard. Only one retrospective clinical study reported on the diagnostic performance of CBCT and showed a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 26%. Two cadaver studies reported sensitivity ranging from 60% to 100%, specificity ranging from 79% to 100%, and an area under the ROC curve of 0.943 for CBCT. The reported sensitivity for digital PA radiography ranged from 27% to 60%, specificity was 99%, and the area under the ROC curve was 0.629. Conclusions: There is a lack of quality evidence and insufficient data to compare diagnostic performance of digital PA and CBCT imaging. This emphasizes the need for well-designed studies to inform clinicians about the relative diagnostic performance of these imaging modalities.
Purpose: To assess the comparative diagnostic performance of digital periapical (PA) radiography and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging on endodontic disease detection and to provide study methodology and design recommendations for future studies comparing the diagnostic performance of imaging modalities on endodontic disease detection. Approach: A search of the Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was conducted. Studies that compared the performance of CBCT to digital PA radiography for detecting endodontic disease had an independent reference standard determining the presence of endodontic disease and conducted data analysis including either sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis or free response operating characteristic analysis were included. Of the 20,530 identified studies, only 3 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results: Most studies assessed for eligibility were excluded due to limitations and biases in study design-15 of 18 studies had no reference standard. Only one retrospective clinical study reported on the diagnostic performance of CBCT and showed a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 26%. Two cadaver studies reported sensitivity ranging from 60% to 100%, specificity ranging from 79% to 100%, and an area under the ROC curve of 0.943 for CBCT. The reported sensitivity for digital PA radiography ranged from 27% to 60%, specificity was 99%, and the area under the ROC curve was 0.629. Conclusions: There is a lack of quality evidence and insufficient data to compare diagnostic performance of digital PA and CBCT imaging. This emphasizes the need for well-designed studies to inform clinicians about the relative diagnostic performance of these imaging modalities.
Authors: Carlos Estrela; Mike Reis Bueno; Cláudio Rodrigues Leles; Bruno Azevedo; José Ribamar Azevedo Journal: J Endod Date: 2008-01-31 Impact factor: 4.171
Authors: Michael M Bornstein; Andreas C Bingisser; Peter A Reichart; Pedram Sendi; Dieter D Bosshardt; Thomas von Arx Journal: J Endod Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 4.171