2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.10.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of simulated small osseous defects in the mandibular condyle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

4
38
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
4
38
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…15 The sensitivity of CBCT for assessing bone defects is dependent on the size of the defects, as demonstrated by Marques et al 16 and confirmed by Patel et al 17 in their investigations of simulated condylar lesions. Extremely small defects, that is, ,2 mm, proved to be difficult to detect, 17 although the sensitivity for detecting condylar osseous defects overall was fairly high: 72.9-87.5%.…”
Section: Diagnostic Accuracymentioning
confidence: 83%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…15 The sensitivity of CBCT for assessing bone defects is dependent on the size of the defects, as demonstrated by Marques et al 16 and confirmed by Patel et al 17 in their investigations of simulated condylar lesions. Extremely small defects, that is, ,2 mm, proved to be difficult to detect, 17 although the sensitivity for detecting condylar osseous defects overall was fairly high: 72.9-87.5%.…”
Section: Diagnostic Accuracymentioning
confidence: 83%
“…15 The sensitivity of CBCT for assessing bone defects is dependent on the size of the defects, as demonstrated by Marques et al 16 and confirmed by Patel et al 17 in their investigations of simulated condylar lesions. Extremely small defects, that is, ,2 mm, proved to be difficult to detect, 17 although the sensitivity for detecting condylar osseous defects overall was fairly high: 72.9-87.5%. These measurements corroborated those reported by Marques et al, 16 but they substantially exceeded those reported by Hintze et al, 12 who investigated morphological changes such as condylar flattening and osteophytes.…”
Section: Diagnostic Accuracymentioning
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…It is believed that cited studies , corroborated the methodology used, since they correlated CBCT with dimensional and positioning and shape changes of condyles. Despite having difficulties in detection by the CBCT of the condylar defect smaller than 2mm 29,30 , this difficulty would not be expected to occur in the present study, since the distances representing the condylar dimensions were measured, but not bone defects. t. In addition, the ICC15 was excellent, confirming the accuracy of the measurements performed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 80%