Cargando…

Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study

BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional (2D) radiographic techniques are commonly used for assessing lesion prognosis after endodontic surgery. The present retrospective cohort study analyzes the sensitivity and ability of different radiographic techniques in obtaining area and volume measurements of periapical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramis-Alario, Amparo, Tarazona-Álvarez, Beatriz, Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel, Soto-Peñaloza, David, Peñarrocha-Diago, María, Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8601649/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34704982
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.24447
_version_ 1784601401573244928
author Ramis-Alario, Amparo
Tarazona-Álvarez, Beatriz
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Soto-Peñaloza, David
Peñarrocha-Diago, María
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
author_facet Ramis-Alario, Amparo
Tarazona-Álvarez, Beatriz
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Soto-Peñaloza, David
Peñarrocha-Diago, María
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
author_sort Ramis-Alario, Amparo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional (2D) radiographic techniques are commonly used for assessing lesion prognosis after endodontic surgery. The present retrospective cohort study analyzes the sensitivity and ability of different radiographic techniques in obtaining area and volume measurements of periapical lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Preoperative and follow-up (6-48 months) periapical and panoramic radiographs (index test) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images (reference standard) were selected from an endodontic microsurgery database. Sensitivity was analyzed independently by two examiners. The areas of the 2D radiographic images and CBCT volumes were studied using Itk-Snap software and Romexis viewer. RESULTS: The sample comprised 105 patients and 105 teeth, with a mean follow-up of 21 months (range 6-48). Preoperatively, CBCT detected all the periapical areas, periapical radiography detected 67, and panoramic radiography detected 60. Postoperatively, of the 52 cases in which CBCT detected remains of the periapical area, periapical radiography detected 22, and panoramic radiography detected 17. The measurements of the areas obtained by the 2D methods, and the volumes obtained by CBCT, had to be transformed into linear measures for comparison purposes. The measurements were found to be significantly different in both the preoperative and the follow-up images. CONCLUSIONS:  Periapical radiography showed greater sensitivity than panoramic radiography, both preoperatively and at follow-up. The lesions measured with CBCT were larger, with significant differences than as evidenced by the periapical and panoramic radiographs. Key words:Periapical radiography, panoramic radiography, CBCT, sensitivity, treatment outcome, size of periapical radiolucency, area, volume.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8601649
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86016492021-11-24 Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study Ramis-Alario, Amparo Tarazona-Álvarez, Beatriz Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel Soto-Peñaloza, David Peñarrocha-Diago, María Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Research BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional (2D) radiographic techniques are commonly used for assessing lesion prognosis after endodontic surgery. The present retrospective cohort study analyzes the sensitivity and ability of different radiographic techniques in obtaining area and volume measurements of periapical lesions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Preoperative and follow-up (6-48 months) periapical and panoramic radiographs (index test) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images (reference standard) were selected from an endodontic microsurgery database. Sensitivity was analyzed independently by two examiners. The areas of the 2D radiographic images and CBCT volumes were studied using Itk-Snap software and Romexis viewer. RESULTS: The sample comprised 105 patients and 105 teeth, with a mean follow-up of 21 months (range 6-48). Preoperatively, CBCT detected all the periapical areas, periapical radiography detected 67, and panoramic radiography detected 60. Postoperatively, of the 52 cases in which CBCT detected remains of the periapical area, periapical radiography detected 22, and panoramic radiography detected 17. The measurements of the areas obtained by the 2D methods, and the volumes obtained by CBCT, had to be transformed into linear measures for comparison purposes. The measurements were found to be significantly different in both the preoperative and the follow-up images. CONCLUSIONS:  Periapical radiography showed greater sensitivity than panoramic radiography, both preoperatively and at follow-up. The lesions measured with CBCT were larger, with significant differences than as evidenced by the periapical and panoramic radiographs. Key words:Periapical radiography, panoramic radiography, CBCT, sensitivity, treatment outcome, size of periapical radiolucency, area, volume. Medicina Oral S.L. 2021-11 2021-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8601649/ /pubmed/34704982 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.24447 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Medicina Oral S.L. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Ramis-Alario, Amparo
Tarazona-Álvarez, Beatriz
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Soto-Peñaloza, David
Peñarrocha-Diago, María
Peñarrocha-Oltra, David
Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title_full Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title_fullStr Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title_full_unstemmed Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title_short Is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? A retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
title_sort is periapical surgery follow-up with only two-dimensional radiographs reliable? a retrospective cohort type sensitivity study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8601649/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34704982
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.24447
work_keys_str_mv AT ramisalarioamparo isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy
AT tarazonaalvarezbeatriz isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy
AT penarrochadiagomiguel isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy
AT sotopenalozadavid isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy
AT penarrochadiagomaria isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy
AT penarrochaoltradavid isperiapicalsurgeryfollowupwithonlytwodimensionalradiographsreliablearetrospectivecohorttypesensitivitystudy