A Comparison of 2- and 3-dimensional Healing Assessment after Endodontic Surgery Using Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Volumes or Periapical Radiographs.

Introduction The aim of this study was to compare the assessment of healing after endodontic microsurgery using 2-dimensional (2D) periapical films versus 3-dimensional (3D) cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) imaging. Methods The healing of 51 teeth from 44 patients was evaluated using Molven's criteria (2D) and modified PENN 3D criteria. The absolute area (2D) and volume (3D) changes of apical lesions preoperatively and at follow-up were calculated by segmentation using OsiriX software (Pixmeo, Bernex, Switzerland) and ITK-Snap (free software). Results There was a significant difference between the mean preoperative lesion volumes of 95.34 mm 3 ( n = 51, standard deviation [SD] ±196.28 mm 3 ) versus 6.48 mm 3 ( n = 51, SD ±17.70 mm 3 ) at follow-up ( P < .05). The mean volume reduction was 83.7%. Preoperatively, mean lesion areas on periapical films were 13.55 mm 2 ( n = 51, SD ±18.80 mm 2 ) and 1.83 mm 2 ( n = 51, SD ±.68 mm 2 ) at follow-up ( P < .05). According to Molven's criteria, 40 teeth were classified as complete healing, 7 as incomplete healing, and 4 as uncertain healing. Based on the modified PENN 3D criteria, 33 teeth were classified as complete healing, 14 as limited healing, 1 as uncertain healing, and 3 as unsatisfactory healing. The variation in the distribution of the 2D and 3D healing classifications was significantly different ( P < .05). Periapical healing statuses incomplete healing or uncertain healing according to Molven's criteria could be clearly classified using 3D criteria. Conclusions CBCT analysis allowed a more precise evaluation of periapical lesions and healing of endodontic microsurgery than periapical films. Significant differences existed between the 2 methods. Over the observation period, the mean periapical lesion sizes significantly decreased in volume. Given the correct indications, the use of CBCT imaging may be a valuable tool for the evaluation of healing of endodontic surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]