Background and Objectives:Image processing and enhancement filters can significantly improve the diagnostic value of digital radiographs. Evidence shows that increasing the contrast and filtering improve the diagnostic accuracy for caries detection. This study sought to assess the diagnostic accuracy of original and enhanced digital radiographs for the detection of approximal and occlusal caries.Subjects and Methods:In this experimental study, incipient carious lesions were artificially created on 120 proximal and occlusal surfaces of human extracted permanent molar and premolar teeth. After mounting the teeth in wax, digital radiographs were obtained using photostimulable phosphor plates and enhanced by enhancement filters 1, 2, and 3 with/without denoising. Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists blinded to filtering viewed the radiographs and filled out a chart. A definite diagnosis was made by a pathologist by observing the samples under a stereomicroscope (gold standard). Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 16. Interobserver agreement was calculated using kappa statistics. Chi-square test was used to assess the correlation between qualitative variables.Results:Assessment of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value showed that enhancement filter 2 without denoising was the most efficient and original radiographs (filter free) were the least efficient radiographs for the detection of carious and sound surfaces. Application of filters significantly increased the accuracy of caries detection on digital radiographs. The lowest diagnostic accuracy was noted for the detection of enamel lesions on original radiographs (52%). Enhancement filter 2 plus denoising was the best filter for the detection of these lesions (79.25%). No significant difference was noted among different filters for detection of carious and sound surfaces but enhanced, and original radiographs were significantly different in visualization and detection of caries (P < 0.05).Conclusion:Application of enhancement filters, particularly enhancement filter 2 with/without denoising, increases the accuracy of caries detection on digital radiographs.
Background:
Early detection of peri-implant bone defects is highly important because these defects eventually lead to gingival recession, bone loss and implant failure.
Objective:
This study aimed to assess and compare the efficacy of periapical radiography and three CBCT systems for the detection of peri-implant dehiscence defects.
Material and Methods:
In this vitro study, 124 titanium implants were placed in bovine ribs. The bone pieces were then mounted in boxes in the form of mandible and red dental wax was used to simulate the soft tissue. Crestal bone defects with 2, 3, and 4 mm depth were created in the ribs using a round bur. Periapical and CBCT images were then obtained. Images were investigated by two oral and maxillofacial radiologists twice with a two-week interval. The results were analyzed using chi-square, Kappa coefficient, Cochrane’s Q and McNemar tests as well as the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Results:
The two observers showed good agreement in detection of sound and defective samples on periapical radiographs and CBCT scans. The level of agreement was low in detection of two samples with 2 mm defects on CBCT scans taken with Planmeca and NewTom 3G systems at the time of second assessment. NewTom 3G had the highest sensitivity (68.9%, 74.2% and 86.3%, respectively) and specificity (100% for all three) compared to other systems for detection of 2, 3 and 4 mm crestal bone defects.
Conclusion:
The inter-observer agreement increased with increase in depth of defects. NewTom 3G had the highest accuracy for detection of crestal bone defects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.