{"title":"In-vitro Comparison of high-resolution USG, CBCT and Direct Measurements of Periodontal Defects.","authors":"Mahmure Ayşe Tayman, Kıvanç Kamburoğlu, Esra Ece Çakmak, Doğukan Özen","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twaf019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), ultrasonography (USG) and direct measurements in linear dimensions of periodontal defects on the buccal alveolar surfaces of mandibular sheep teeth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 88 defects were artificially created, including dehiscence, fenestration, grade I and II endodontic-periodontal defects. Two observers performed measurements twice. Maximum length, depth and width of the defects were measured with all three methods. Manual measurements were accepted as the gold standard. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. The mean value of the measurements, the bias, the standard deviation of the differences, and the limits of agreement were estimated. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent, suggesting ICCs 0.988-1 and 0.981-1, respectively. The highest CCs were obtained from depth measurements, while the lowest CCs were obtained from length measurements. Although the differences were scattered around the bias. The estimated bias values for USG and CBCT were 0,18 (0,153-0,21) (p < 0.001) and 0,091 (0,079-0,102) (p < 0.001), respectively. Observers recorded measurements which were slightly underestimated with both techniques utilized.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Observers measured periodontal defects with clinically acceptable underestimations by using CBCT and USG.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>It is important to compare different innovative imaging modalities and gauge their efficiency in the measurement of various types of periodontal defects in terms of treatment planning, prognosis and follow up of those cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twaf019","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), ultrasonography (USG) and direct measurements in linear dimensions of periodontal defects on the buccal alveolar surfaces of mandibular sheep teeth.
Methods: A total of 88 defects were artificially created, including dehiscence, fenestration, grade I and II endodontic-periodontal defects. Two observers performed measurements twice. Maximum length, depth and width of the defects were measured with all three methods. Manual measurements were accepted as the gold standard. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. The mean value of the measurements, the bias, the standard deviation of the differences, and the limits of agreement were estimated. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results: Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent, suggesting ICCs 0.988-1 and 0.981-1, respectively. The highest CCs were obtained from depth measurements, while the lowest CCs were obtained from length measurements. Although the differences were scattered around the bias. The estimated bias values for USG and CBCT were 0,18 (0,153-0,21) (p < 0.001) and 0,091 (0,079-0,102) (p < 0.001), respectively. Observers recorded measurements which were slightly underestimated with both techniques utilized.
Conclusions: Observers measured periodontal defects with clinically acceptable underestimations by using CBCT and USG.
Advances in knowledge: It is important to compare different innovative imaging modalities and gauge their efficiency in the measurement of various types of periodontal defects in terms of treatment planning, prognosis and follow up of those cases.
期刊介绍:
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging.
Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology.
The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal.
Quick Facts:
- 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919
- Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks
- Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks
- Open access option
- ISSN: 0250-832X
- eISSN: 1476-542X