三种成像方式检测分离的肛管内器械的准确性、敏感性和特异性

IF 0.5 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Sara Alemam, Shaimaa Abuelsadat, S. Saber, T. Elsewify
{"title":"三种成像方式检测分离的肛管内器械的准确性、敏感性和特异性","authors":"Sara Alemam, Shaimaa Abuelsadat, S. Saber, T. Elsewify","doi":"10.32067/GIE.2020.34.01.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To compare the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of CBCT imaging and two dimensional periapical radiography in detection of separated intracanal endodontic instruments with and without root canal filling. \nMethodology:  Eighty (n=80) extracted mandibular molars were randomly divided into four groups (n=20); control, fracture/non-filled, non-fracture/ filled, and fracture/filled.  Molars were placed in a mandible for imaging.  Conventional 2D radiography using D-speed periapical film (SKYDENT, Slovak Republic), semidirect digital radiographs using Soredex Digora Optime system (DIGORAOptime, Soredex, Finland), and cone beam computed tomography using Gendex-GXDP 800 (GENDEX GXDP-800 Kavo, Germany) were acquired.  An artifact reduction algorithm was applied.  Images were evaluated by three blinded examiners (two endodontists and one radiologist).  Qualitative examination for the presence/absence of separated instrument was performed according to a 5-point rank scale (1, definitely absent; 2, probably absent; 3, uncertainty; 4, probably present; and 5, definitely present).  Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated as well as inter-observer reliability. Statistical analysis was performed and significance level was set at 5%.  \nResults: Non-filled groups showed no significant difference between all three tested imaging modalities.  Filled groups showed statistically decreased accuracy and sensitivity of CBCT.  Good inter-observer agreement was shown.  \nConclusion:  Conventional 2D radiography is a good tool for detection of intracanal separated instruments in filled canals.","PeriodicalId":42221,"journal":{"name":"Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of three imaging modalities in detection of separated intracanal instruments\",\"authors\":\"Sara Alemam, Shaimaa Abuelsadat, S. Saber, T. Elsewify\",\"doi\":\"10.32067/GIE.2020.34.01.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: To compare the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of CBCT imaging and two dimensional periapical radiography in detection of separated intracanal endodontic instruments with and without root canal filling. \\nMethodology:  Eighty (n=80) extracted mandibular molars were randomly divided into four groups (n=20); control, fracture/non-filled, non-fracture/ filled, and fracture/filled.  Molars were placed in a mandible for imaging.  Conventional 2D radiography using D-speed periapical film (SKYDENT, Slovak Republic), semidirect digital radiographs using Soredex Digora Optime system (DIGORAOptime, Soredex, Finland), and cone beam computed tomography using Gendex-GXDP 800 (GENDEX GXDP-800 Kavo, Germany) were acquired.  An artifact reduction algorithm was applied.  Images were evaluated by three blinded examiners (two endodontists and one radiologist).  Qualitative examination for the presence/absence of separated instrument was performed according to a 5-point rank scale (1, definitely absent; 2, probably absent; 3, uncertainty; 4, probably present; and 5, definitely present).  Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated as well as inter-observer reliability. Statistical analysis was performed and significance level was set at 5%.  \\nResults: Non-filled groups showed no significant difference between all three tested imaging modalities.  Filled groups showed statistically decreased accuracy and sensitivity of CBCT.  Good inter-observer agreement was shown.  \\nConclusion:  Conventional 2D radiography is a good tool for detection of intracanal separated instruments in filled canals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42221,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32067/GIE.2020.34.01.03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32067/GIE.2020.34.01.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的:比较CBCT成像与二维根尖周x线摄影检测分离根管内器械是否充填根管的准确性、敏感性和特异性。方法:80颗拔除的下颌磨牙随机分为4组(n=20);控制,断裂/非填充,非断裂/填充,断裂/填充。将臼齿置于下颌骨进行成像。使用D-speed根尖周膜(SKYDENT,斯洛伐克共和国)进行常规二维x线摄影,使用Soredex Digora Optime系统(DIGORAOptime, Soredex,芬兰)进行半直接数字x线摄影,使用GENDEX - gxdp 800 (GENDEX GXDP-800 Kavo,德国)进行锥束计算机断层摄影。采用了一种伪影减少算法。图像由三名盲法检查人员(两名牙髓科医生和一名放射科医生)评估。根据5分等级量表(1,绝对不存在;2,可能缺席;3、不确定性;4、可能存在;5,肯定存在)。计算准确性、敏感性和特异性以及观察者间信度。进行统计学分析,显著性水平设为5%。结果:非填充组在所有三种测试成像方式之间没有显着差异。填充组显示CBCT的准确性和敏感性在统计学上有所下降。观察员间表现出良好的一致。结论:常规二维x线摄影是检测填充管内分离器械的良好工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of three imaging modalities in detection of separated intracanal instruments
Aim: To compare the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of CBCT imaging and two dimensional periapical radiography in detection of separated intracanal endodontic instruments with and without root canal filling. Methodology:  Eighty (n=80) extracted mandibular molars were randomly divided into four groups (n=20); control, fracture/non-filled, non-fracture/ filled, and fracture/filled.  Molars were placed in a mandible for imaging.  Conventional 2D radiography using D-speed periapical film (SKYDENT, Slovak Republic), semidirect digital radiographs using Soredex Digora Optime system (DIGORAOptime, Soredex, Finland), and cone beam computed tomography using Gendex-GXDP 800 (GENDEX GXDP-800 Kavo, Germany) were acquired.  An artifact reduction algorithm was applied.  Images were evaluated by three blinded examiners (two endodontists and one radiologist).  Qualitative examination for the presence/absence of separated instrument was performed according to a 5-point rank scale (1, definitely absent; 2, probably absent; 3, uncertainty; 4, probably present; and 5, definitely present).  Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated as well as inter-observer reliability. Statistical analysis was performed and significance level was set at 5%.  Results: Non-filled groups showed no significant difference between all three tested imaging modalities.  Filled groups showed statistically decreased accuracy and sensitivity of CBCT.  Good inter-observer agreement was shown.  Conclusion:  Conventional 2D radiography is a good tool for detection of intracanal separated instruments in filled canals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia
Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia was founded in 1987 and is the official journal of the Italian Society of Endodontics (SIE). It is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original articles on clinical research and/or clinical methodology, case reports related to Endodontics. The Journal evaluates also contributes in restorative dentistry, dental traumatology, experimental pathophysiology, pharmacology and microbiology dealing with Endodontics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信