A review of cone beam computed tomography for the diagnosis of root resorption associated with impacted canines, introducing an innovative root resorption scale

Reliability of different radiographic methods for the localization of displaced maxillary canines

“…19,20 That means that we considered that CBCT images provide accurate diagnoses in every patient. 11,14,21 All radiographs were taken in the Radiology Department at the School of Dentistry of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. For the panoramic x-rays (Fig 1), a Promax unit (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) was used.…”

Diagnostic efficacy of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: a systematic review

“…Possible inclusion of more difficult cases Use of expert-based reference standard, which was based on the viewing of the index test images No standardised CBCT imaging format No standardised conventional radiograph combination Clinical context(s) Pathological conditions Purpose of imaging Diagnosis of root resorption in permanent incisors in relation to canine impactions. Jawad et al ( 2016 ) Diagnostic efficacy level Level 3: Diagnostic thinking efficacy Imaging (index tests) CBCT: “The majority of the CBCT images were taken with an OP300 machine” with “small volume” Conventional radiography varied between patients but most only had a panoramic radiograph Reference standard Not applicable Patient sample description 35 patient cases, over a 1-year period, in which CBCT imaging was taken to assess root resorption associated with impacted canines. 42 canines in sample, 40 in maxilla and 2 in the mandible Ages: not specified, gender: not specified, setting: University-based secondary care specialist centre in the UK Key outcomes Root resorption observed on 63% of cases using CBCT and 19% of cases using radiographs Of 14 cases judged not to be resorbed on radiographs, 5 had root resorption on viewing CBCT Study strengths Assessment of intra-observer repeatability made Study weaknesses Retrospective study Potential selection bias (inclusion of patients who had been a priori chosen for CBCT) Lack of detail on the patient sample Variable conventional imaging Lack of detail on conduct of index tests Clinical context(s) Pathological conditions Purpose of imaging As an aid to treatment planning for external cervical resorption (ECR) Goodell et al ( 2018 ) Diagnostic efficacy level Level 4: therapeutic efficacy Imaging (index tests) CBCT [3D Accuitomo 170; FoV = 40 × 40 mm; voxel size 0.08 mm] Intraoral radiographs (digital, CCD sensor); unclear how many and which type Six examiners (2 specialist endodontists, 2 senior endodontic residents, 2 junior endodontic residents) …”

“…The results of quality assessment of diagnostic thinking efficacy and therapeutic efficacy studies are presented using a visual analogue scale, following a previous review method (Horner and Shelley 2016). No study was assessed at the highest level of quality, but two (Katheria et al 2010;Jawad et al 2016) were assessed below the mid-point of the scale for quality. The two societal efficacy publications (Christell et al 2012a, b) For studies including a patient outcome assessment, Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list (Evers et al 2005) For cost analysis studies without a patient outcome assessment, the proforma used by Christell et al (2014) based on Drummond et al (2005) were both cost analyses, a design that lacks any measurement of patient outcomes.…”

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Oral and Maxillofacial Imaging

“…In a recent clinical study, Jawad et al reported that CBCT provided improved detection rates (63% versus 45% for plain radiographs) of root resorption associated with impacted canines. The authors also introduced a new root resorption scale for CBCT imaging [29].…”