IADR Abstract Archives
Accuracy Of Cone Beam Computed Tomography And Digital Radiography Versus Clearing Techinque In Detection Of Confluent Canals In Mandibular Molars (In-Vitro Study)
Objectives: To compare the accuracy of digital periapical radiography (DPR) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting confluent canals in mandibular first and second molars versus the gold standard clearing technique.
Methods: This study was conducted on thirty-three extracted humans first and second mandibular molars (for periodontal reasons). All samples were inserted into a human cadaver’s mandible, the teeth were mounted in the prepared alveolar sockets in the molar region to simulate a natural alignment and were fixed in the socket by wax. The teeth were scanned by CBCT and DPR from 0° and 20°mesial- and distal-tube shifts, then cleared and stained. All interpreted Data from DPR and CBCT were statistically compared with clearing technique by using Receiver operating curve analysis test (MedCalc Software Ltd.Version 20.115) and the statistical significance was set at (p<0.05).
Results: The statistical analysis showed that there was no significant difference between CBCT and the clearing technique (p= 0.12), while DPR with a statistically significant difference from the clearing technique (p <0.001). The overall diagnostic accuracy outcomes were significantly higher for CBCT than DPR (p <0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and AUC values were higher for CBCT than DPR. Sensitivity was 0.95 for CBCT compared to only 0.63 in case of DPR, and specificity was 0.98 and 0.87, for CBCT and DPR, respectively. DPR was able to correctly distinguish confluent canals in 63.2% of those identified by clearing method, compared to 94.7% correctly distinguished by CBCT.
Conclusions: CBCT has a greater accuracy in detection of confluent canals than DPR in mandibular molar teeth.
Methods: This study was conducted on thirty-three extracted humans first and second mandibular molars (for periodontal reasons). All samples were inserted into a human cadaver’s mandible, the teeth were mounted in the prepared alveolar sockets in the molar region to simulate a natural alignment and were fixed in the socket by wax. The teeth were scanned by CBCT and DPR from 0° and 20°mesial- and distal-tube shifts, then cleared and stained. All interpreted Data from DPR and CBCT were statistically compared with clearing technique by using Receiver operating curve analysis test (MedCalc Software Ltd.Version 20.115) and the statistical significance was set at (p<0.05).
Results: The statistical analysis showed that there was no significant difference between CBCT and the clearing technique (p= 0.12), while DPR with a statistically significant difference from the clearing technique (p <0.001). The overall diagnostic accuracy outcomes were significantly higher for CBCT than DPR (p <0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and AUC values were higher for CBCT than DPR. Sensitivity was 0.95 for CBCT compared to only 0.63 in case of DPR, and specificity was 0.98 and 0.87, for CBCT and DPR, respectively. DPR was able to correctly distinguish confluent canals in 63.2% of those identified by clearing method, compared to 94.7% correctly distinguished by CBCT.
Conclusions: CBCT has a greater accuracy in detection of confluent canals than DPR in mandibular molar teeth.
3810461_File000000.jpg