Cargando…

Influence of CBCT metal artifact reduction on vertical radicular fracture detection

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the influence of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) tool in a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) device on the diagnosis of vertical root fractures (VRFs) in teeth with different root filling materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five extracted human premolars were cl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oliveira, Mariana Rodrigues, Sousa, Thiago Oliveira, Caetano, Aline Ferreira, de Paiva, Rogério Ribeiro, Valladares-Neto, José, Yamamoto-Silva, Fernanda Paula, Silva, Maria Alves Garcia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8007395/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33828962
http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.20200191
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: This study evaluated the influence of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) tool in a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) device on the diagnosis of vertical root fractures (VRFs) in teeth with different root filling materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five extracted human premolars were classified into three subgroups; 1) no filling; 2) gutta-percha; and 3) metallic post. CBCT images were acquired using an Orthopantomograph 300 unit with and without a MAR tool. Subsequently, the same teeth were fractured, and new CBCT scans were obtained with and without MAR. Two oral radiologists evaluated the images regarding the presence or absence of VRF. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and diagnostic tests were performed. RESULTS: The overall area under the curve values were 0.695 for CBCT with MAR and 0.789 for CBCT without MAR. The MAR tool negatively influenced the overall diagnosis of VRFs in all tested subgroups, with lower accuracy (0.45–0.72), sensitivity (0.6–0.67), and specificity (0.23–0.8) than were found for the images without MAR. In the latter group, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity values were 0.68–0.77, 0.67–083, and 0.53–087, respectively. However, no significant difference was found between images with and without MAR for the no filling and gutta-percha subgroups (P>0.05). In the metallic post subgroup, CBCT showed a significant difference according to MAR use (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The OP 300 MAR tool negatively influenced the detection of VRFs in teeth with no root canal filling, gutta-percha, or metallic posts. Teeth with metallic posts suffered the most from the negative impact of MAR.