Débora Costa Ruiz, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Hugo Gaêta-Araujo, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Matheus L Oliveira, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Francisco Haiter-Neto
{"title":"不同数字系统下手持x线机对近端龋病诊断的影响。","authors":"Débora Costa Ruiz, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Hugo Gaêta-Araujo, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Matheus L Oliveira, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Francisco Haiter-Neto","doi":"10.1007/s11282-025-00805-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the influence of a handheld X-ray unit in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions using different digital systems by comparing with a wall-mounted unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Radiographs of 40 human teeth were acquired using the Eagle X-ray handheld unit (Alliage, São Paulo, Brazil) set at 2.5 mA, 60 kVp and an exposure time of 0.45 s. Then, new radiographs of the teeth were acquired using the Focus X-ray wall-mounted unit (Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland) set at 7 mA, 60 kVp, and exposure time of 0.16 s. Three digital systems were used: a photostimulable phosphor plate receptor (Express system) and two complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensors (Digora Toto and SnapShot systems). Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists individually assessed the radiographs. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated from the responses of the examiners and compared using Analysis of Variance at a significance level of 5%. The weighted Kappa index evaluated the intra- and inter-examiner agreements for caries lesions diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The handheld X-ray unit did not influence on the diagnostic metrics for the three digital systems used when compared with the wall-mounted unit (p > 0.05). The SnapShot showed higher AUC value than Digora Toto (p < 0.05). The mean values of intra- and inter-examiner agreements were 0.654 (substantial) and 0.365 (fair), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy for detecting proximal caries lesions is not influenced by the use of a handheld X-ray unit, regardless of the digital system used.</p>","PeriodicalId":56103,"journal":{"name":"Oral Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of a handheld X-ray unit in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions using different digital systems.\",\"authors\":\"Débora Costa Ruiz, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Hugo Gaêta-Araujo, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Matheus L Oliveira, Deborah Queiroz Freitas, Francisco Haiter-Neto\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11282-025-00805-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the influence of a handheld X-ray unit in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions using different digital systems by comparing with a wall-mounted unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Radiographs of 40 human teeth were acquired using the Eagle X-ray handheld unit (Alliage, São Paulo, Brazil) set at 2.5 mA, 60 kVp and an exposure time of 0.45 s. Then, new radiographs of the teeth were acquired using the Focus X-ray wall-mounted unit (Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland) set at 7 mA, 60 kVp, and exposure time of 0.16 s. Three digital systems were used: a photostimulable phosphor plate receptor (Express system) and two complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensors (Digora Toto and SnapShot systems). Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists individually assessed the radiographs. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated from the responses of the examiners and compared using Analysis of Variance at a significance level of 5%. The weighted Kappa index evaluated the intra- and inter-examiner agreements for caries lesions diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The handheld X-ray unit did not influence on the diagnostic metrics for the three digital systems used when compared with the wall-mounted unit (p > 0.05). The SnapShot showed higher AUC value than Digora Toto (p < 0.05). The mean values of intra- and inter-examiner agreements were 0.654 (substantial) and 0.365 (fair), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy for detecting proximal caries lesions is not influenced by the use of a handheld X-ray unit, regardless of the digital system used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oral Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oral Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-025-00805-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-025-00805-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:通过与壁挂式x线机的比较,评价不同数字系统下手持x线机对近端龋病变诊断的影响。方法:使用Eagle x线手持设备(Alliage, s o Paulo, Brazil),采集40颗人牙齿的x线片,设置为2.5 mA, 60 kVp,曝光时间0.45 s。然后,使用Focus x射线壁挂式单元(Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland)获得牙齿的新x线片,设置为7 mA, 60 kVp,曝光时间0.16 s。使用了三个数字系统:一个光刺激荧光粉板受体(Express系统)和两个互补金属氧化物半导体传感器(Digora Toto和SnapShot系统)。5名口腔颌面放射科医生分别评估了x线片。根据审查员的回答计算接受者工作特征曲线下的面积(AUC)、敏感性和特异性,并使用方差分析进行比较,显著性水平为5%。加权Kappa指数评估内部和内部审查员对龋齿病变诊断的协议。结果:与壁挂式x线机相比,手持式x线机对三种数字系统的诊断指标没有影响(p > 0.05)。SnapShot的AUC值高于Digora Toto (p)。结论:无论使用何种数字系统,手持式x线机对近端龋齿病变的诊断准确性不受影响。
Influence of a handheld X-ray unit in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions using different digital systems.
Objectives: To assess the influence of a handheld X-ray unit in the diagnosis of proximal caries lesions using different digital systems by comparing with a wall-mounted unit.
Methods: Radiographs of 40 human teeth were acquired using the Eagle X-ray handheld unit (Alliage, São Paulo, Brazil) set at 2.5 mA, 60 kVp and an exposure time of 0.45 s. Then, new radiographs of the teeth were acquired using the Focus X-ray wall-mounted unit (Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland) set at 7 mA, 60 kVp, and exposure time of 0.16 s. Three digital systems were used: a photostimulable phosphor plate receptor (Express system) and two complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensors (Digora Toto and SnapShot systems). Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists individually assessed the radiographs. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated from the responses of the examiners and compared using Analysis of Variance at a significance level of 5%. The weighted Kappa index evaluated the intra- and inter-examiner agreements for caries lesions diagnosis.
Results: The handheld X-ray unit did not influence on the diagnostic metrics for the three digital systems used when compared with the wall-mounted unit (p > 0.05). The SnapShot showed higher AUC value than Digora Toto (p < 0.05). The mean values of intra- and inter-examiner agreements were 0.654 (substantial) and 0.365 (fair), respectively.
Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy for detecting proximal caries lesions is not influenced by the use of a handheld X-ray unit, regardless of the digital system used.
期刊介绍:
As the official English-language journal of the Japanese Society for Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and the Asian Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Oral Radiology is intended to be a forum for international collaboration in head and neck diagnostic imaging and all related fields. Oral Radiology features cutting-edge research papers, review articles, case reports, and technical notes from both the clinical and experimental fields. As membership in the Society is not a prerequisite, contributions are welcome from researchers and clinicians worldwide.