Back to Search
Start Over
Influence of tube current and metal artifact reduction on the diagnosis of external cervical resorption in teeth adjacent to a dental implant in CBCT: an ex-vivo study.
- Source :
-
Clinical oral investigations [Clin Oral Investig] 2024 Jun 04; Vol. 28 (6), pp. 356. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jun 04. - Publication Year :
- 2024
-
Abstract
- Objectives: This ex-vivo study aimed to assess the influence of tube current (mA) and metal artifact reduction (MAR) on the diagnosis of early external cervical resorption (EECR) in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the presence of an adjacent dental implant.<br />Materials and Methods: Twenty-three single-rooted teeth were sectioned longitudinally and EECR was induced using a spherical drill and 5% nitric acid in 10 teeth. Each tooth was positioned in the socket of the lower right canine of a dry human mandible and CBCT scans were acquired using 90 kVp, voxel of 0.085 mm, field of view of 5 x 5 cm, and varying tube current (4, 8 or 12 mA), MAR (enabled or disabled) and implant conditions (with a zirconia implant in the socket of the lower right first premolar or without). Five oral radiologists evaluated the presence of EECR in a 5-point scale and the diagnostic values (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve - AUC, sensitivity, and specificity) were compared using multi-way Analysis of Variance (α = 0.05). Kappa test assessed intra-/inter-evaluator agreement.<br />Results: The tube current only influenced the AUC values in the presence of the implant and when MAR disabled; in this case, 8 mA showed lower values (p<0.007). MAR did not influence the diagnostic values (p>0.05). In general, the presence of an implant reduced the AUC values (p<0.0001); sensitivity values with 8 mA and MAR disabled, and specificity values with 4 mA and MAR enabled and 8 mA regardless MAR were also decreased (p<0.0001).<br />Conclusions: Variations in tube current and MAR were unable to improve EECR detection, which was impaired by the presence of an adjacent implant.<br />Clinical Relevance: Increasing tube current or activating MAR tool does not improve EECR diagnosis, which is hampered by the artifacts generated by dental implants.<br /> (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1436-3771
- Volume :
- 28
- Issue :
- 6
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Clinical oral investigations
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 38834721
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05750-y