Performance of different cone-beam computed tomography scan modes with and without metal artifact reduction in detection of recurrent dental caries under various restorative materials.
{"title":"Performance of different cone-beam computed tomography scan modes with and without metal artifact reduction in detection of recurrent dental caries under various restorative materials.","authors":"Farida Abesi, Fatemehzahra Talachi, Fariba Ezoji","doi":"10.5114/pjr/188257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan modes with and without the application of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) option under 5 different restorative materials.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Our research was an in vitro study with 150 caries-free premolars and molars. The teeth were randomly divided into experimental (with artificially induced caries, <i>n</i> = 75) and control (without caries, <i>n</i> = 75) groups and were prepared based on 5 types of restorative materials, including conventional composites (Filtek Z250, Gradia), flow composite, glass ionomer, and amalgam. The teeth were examined under 2 CBCT scan modes (high-resolution [HIRes] and standard) with and without MAR application. Finally, the diagnostic accuracy index values (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], sensitivity, and specificity) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AUC of standard scan mode with the MAR option was significantly lower than that of HIRes with MAR (<i>p</i> = 0.018) and without MAR option (<i>p</i> = 0.011) in detecting recurrent caries. Also, without MAR option, the diagnostic accuracy (AUC) of the standard mode was significantly lower than that of the HIRes (<i>p</i> = 0.020). Similar findings were observed for sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, diagnostic performance of standard and HIRes scan modes with and without MAR in the amalgam group was lower than that in other restorative material groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic performance of HIRes CBCT mode was higher than that of standard mode for recurrent caries and remained unaffected by MAR application. However, the accuracy in detecting recurrent caries was lower in the amalgam group compared with other restorative material groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":94174,"journal":{"name":"Polish journal of radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11262014/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr/188257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan modes with and without the application of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) option under 5 different restorative materials.
Material and methods: Our research was an in vitro study with 150 caries-free premolars and molars. The teeth were randomly divided into experimental (with artificially induced caries, n = 75) and control (without caries, n = 75) groups and were prepared based on 5 types of restorative materials, including conventional composites (Filtek Z250, Gradia), flow composite, glass ionomer, and amalgam. The teeth were examined under 2 CBCT scan modes (high-resolution [HIRes] and standard) with and without MAR application. Finally, the diagnostic accuracy index values (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], sensitivity, and specificity) were calculated.
Results: The AUC of standard scan mode with the MAR option was significantly lower than that of HIRes with MAR (p = 0.018) and without MAR option (p = 0.011) in detecting recurrent caries. Also, without MAR option, the diagnostic accuracy (AUC) of the standard mode was significantly lower than that of the HIRes (p = 0.020). Similar findings were observed for sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, diagnostic performance of standard and HIRes scan modes with and without MAR in the amalgam group was lower than that in other restorative material groups.
Conclusions: Diagnostic performance of HIRes CBCT mode was higher than that of standard mode for recurrent caries and remained unaffected by MAR application. However, the accuracy in detecting recurrent caries was lower in the amalgam group compared with other restorative material groups.