Advertisement

Low-dose Multidetector Computed Tomographic and Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Protocols for Volumetric Measurement of Simulated Periapical Lesions

Published:April 22, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2021.04.019

      Abstract

      Introduction

      The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of low-dose multidetector computed tomographic (LD-MDCT) imaging for the volumetric measurement of simulated periapical lesions.

      Methods

      Eighteen monoradicular teeth were introduced in bone blocks, and periapical lesions were simulated at the periapical region of each tooth. All teeth were imaged using 4 acquisition protocols: large (dentoalveolar) field of view (FOV) cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) imaging (120 kV, 5 mA, and 0.2-mm voxel), small (dental) FOV CBCT imaging (90 kV, 10 mA, and 0.2-mm voxel), standard multidetector computed tomographic imaging (120 kV, 50 mA, and 0.62-mm voxel), and LD-MDCT imaging (120 kV, 10 mA, and 0.62-mm voxel). Tomographic images were evaluated by a single trained and calibrated examiner (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.991) using ITK-SNAP segmentation software (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA). The gold standard was obtained by the impressions of the lesions with regular fluid addition silicone and individual weighing using a precision analytical scale. Data were evaluated by the repeated measures analysis of variance test; the significance level was defined as P < .05.

      Results

      No statistical differences (P > .05) were found among the groups regardless of the device, milliamperage, FOV, or voxel size.

      Conclusions

      LD-MDCT shows performance comparable with other standard reference methods for measuring the volume of periapical lesions and can be a useful and safe protocol in clinical situations in which CBCT imaging is not available, such as in cases of patients admitted to hospitals.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      References

        • Pak J.G.
        • Fayazi S.
        • White S.N.
        Prevalence of periapical radiolucency and root canal treatment: a systematic review of cross-sectional studies.
        J Endod. 2012; 38: 1170-1176
        • Holland R.
        • Valle G.F.
        • Taintor J.F.
        • Ingle J.I.
        Influence of bony resorption on endodontic treatment.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 1983; 55: 191-203
        • Garrido M.
        • Cárdenas A.M.
        • Astorga J.
        • et al.
        Elevated systemic inflammatory burden and cardiovascular risk in young adults with endodontic apical lesions.
        J Endod. 2019; 45: 111-115
        • Tibúrcio-Machado C.S.
        • Bello M.D.
        • Maier J.
        • et al.
        Influence of diabetes in the development of apical periodontitis: a critical literature review of human studies.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 370-376
        • Tanomaru-Filho M.
        • Jorge E.G.
        • Duarte M.A.
        • et al.
        Comparative radiographic and histological analyses of periapical lesion development.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 107: 183-187
        • Huumonen S.
        • Ørstavik D.
        Radiological aspects of apical periodontitis.
        Endod Topics. 2002; 1: 3-25
      1. SEDENTEXCT guidelines. Safety and efficacy of a new and emerging dental X-ray modality: radiation protection no. 172—cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Evidence European Commission. 2012.
        (Available at:) (Accessed April 3, 2019)
        • Patel S.
        • Brown J.
        • Pimentel T.
        • et al.
        Cone beam computed tomography in endodontics – a review of the literature.
        Int Endod J. 2019; 52: 1138-1152
        • Scarfe W.C.
        • Farman A.G.
        • Sukovic P.
        Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice.
        J Can Dent Assoc. 2006; 72: 75-80
        • Scarfe W.C.
        • Farman A.G.
        What is cone-beam CT and how does it work?.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2008; 52: 707-730
        • Suomalainen A.
        • Kiljunen T.
        • Kaser Y.
        • et al.
        Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009; 38: 367-378
        • Nardi C.
        • Talamonti C.
        • Pallotta S.
        • et al.
        Head and neck effective dose and quantitative assessment of image quality: a study to compare Cone beam CT and Multislice spiral CT.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017; 46: 20170030
        • Widmann G.
        • Bischel A.
        • Stratis A.
        • et al.
        Spatial and contrast resolution of ultralow dose dentomaxillofacial CT imaging using iterative reconstruction technology.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017; 46: 20160452
        • Jeong D.K.
        • Lee S.C.
        • Huh K.H.
        • et al.
        Comparison of effective dose for imaging of mandible between multi-detector CT and cone-beam CT.
        Imaging Sci Dent. 2012; 42: 65-70
        • Bulla S.
        • Blank P.
        • Hassepass F.
        • et al.
        Reducing the radiation dose for low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses using iterative reconstruction: Feasibility and image quality.
        Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81: 2246-2250
        • Al-Ekrish A.A.
        • Alfaleh W.
        • Hormann R.
        • et al.
        Localization of the inferior alveolar canal using ultralow dose CT with iterative reconstruction techniques.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018; 47: 20170477
        • Schropp L.
        • Alyass N.S.
        • Wenzel A.
        • Stavropoulos A.
        Validity of wax and acrylic as soft-tissue simulation materials used in in vitro radiographic studies.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012; 41: 686-690
        • Yushkevich P.A.
        • Piven J.
        • Hazlett H.C.
        • et al.
        User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability.
        Neuroimage. 2006; 31: 1116-1128
        • European Commission Radiation Protection 136
        European Guidelines on Radiation Protection in Dental Radiology. 2004.
        (Available at:) (Accessed December 2, 2019)
        • Mota de Almeida F.J.
        • Knutsson K.
        • Flygare L.
        The impact of cone beam computed tomography on the choice of endodontic diagnosis.
        Int Endod J. 2015; 48: 564-572
        • Paula-Silva F.W.
        • Santamaria Jr., M.
        • Leonardo M.R.
        • et al.
        Cone-beam computerized tomographic, radiographic, and histologic evaluation of periapical repair in dogs’ post-endodontic treatment.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 108: 796-805
        • Recommendations
        • ICRP
        of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
        ICRP Publication. 2007; 103: 49-58
        • Farman A.G.
        ALARA still applies.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 100: 395-397
        • Jaju P.P.
        • Jaju S.P.
        Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA.
        Imaging Sci Dent. 2015; 45: 263-265
        • Ludlow J.B.
        • Timothy R.
        • Walker C.
        • et al.
        Effective dose of dental CBCT—a meta-analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44: 20140197
        • Kamburiglu K.
        • Murat S.
        • Kolsuz E.
        • et al.
        Comparative assessment of subjective image quality of cross-sectional cone-beam computed tomography scans.
        J Oral Sci. 2011; 53: 501-508
        • Liedke G.S.
        • da Silveira H.E.
        • da Silveira H.L.
        • et al.
        Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to evaluate simulated external root resorption.
        J Endod. 2009; 35: 233-235
        • Vizzotto M.B.
        • Silveira P.F.
        • Arús N.A.
        • et al.
        CBCT for the assessment of second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in maxillary molar teeth: effect of voxel size and presence of root filling.
        Int Endod J. 2013; 46: 870-876
        • Da Silveira P.F.
        • Vizzotto M.B.
        • Liedke G.S.
        • et al.
        Detection of vertical root fractures by conventional radiographic examination and cone beam computed tomography – an in vitro analysis.
        Dent Traumatol. 2012; 29: 41-46
        • Da Silveira P.F.
        • Fontana M.P.
        • Oliveira H.W.
        • et al.
        CBCT-based volume of simulated root resorption – influence of FOV and voxel size.
        Int Endod J. 2015; 48: 959-965
        • Ahlowalia M.S.
        • Patel S.
        • Anwar H.M.
        • et al.
        Accuracy of CBCT for volumetric measurement of simulated periapical lesions.
        Int Endod J. 2012; 46: 538-546
        • Esposito S.A.
        • Huybrechts B.
        • Slagmolen P.
        • et al.
        A novel method to estimate the volume of bone defects using cone-beam computed tomography: an in vitro study.
        J Endod. 2013; 39: 1111-1115
        • Petersson A.
        • Axelsson S.
        • Davidson T.
        • et al.
        Radiological diagnosis of periapical bone tissue lesions in endodontics: a systematic review.
        Int Endod J. 2012; 45: 783-801
        • Miranda A.F.
        • Araújo I.A.
        • Araújo H.B.
        • et al.
        Oral health promotion in intensive care unit patients: management and adaptations.
        Glo Adv Res J Med Sc. 2015; 4: 509-513