2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of Vertical Root Fractures by Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography: A Clinical Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

8
91
0
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 131 publications
(103 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
8
91
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…A recent systematic study concluded that there were no evidence-based data on the diagnostic accuracy of radiographic dental evaluation for diagnosis of VRF in endodontically treated teeth (7). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) might be better, due to its superior diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity 88%, specificity 75%) (8). The diagnostic approach advocated by Tamse (6) was followed in the present case; however, a second radiograph was not necessary, and apical periodontitis and lesions of periodontal or endoperiodontal origin were excluded.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…A recent systematic study concluded that there were no evidence-based data on the diagnostic accuracy of radiographic dental evaluation for diagnosis of VRF in endodontically treated teeth (7). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) might be better, due to its superior diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity 88%, specificity 75%) (8). The diagnostic approach advocated by Tamse (6) was followed in the present case; however, a second radiograph was not necessary, and apical periodontitis and lesions of periodontal or endoperiodontal origin were excluded.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…CBCT is often used to detect VRF because studies have proven its accuracy in diagnosing VRF (12, 13). Edlund et al (13) showed that the sensitivity and specificity of CBCT in detecting VRF in root-treated teeth was 88% and 75%, respectively. Despite its high sensitivity, the comparatively low specificity of CBCT creates a higher chance of over-diagnosing the presence of VRF.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Scores 0 and 1 were considered as absence of fracture and score 2 was considered as presence of fracture in statistical analysis (13). In assessment of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of CBCT, observing a fracture in one of the planes meant that the tooth had a fracture.…”
Section: A Eskandarloo Et Almentioning
confidence: 99%