Diagnostic accuracy of conventional and digital radiography for detecting misfit between the tooth and restoration in metal-restored teeth

Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography sections with various thicknesses for detecting misfit between the tooth and restoration in metal-restored teeth

“…A recent study reported high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (0.83, 0.92, and 0.86, respectively) when digital radiographs were used for detecting restoration (crown and MOD filling) misfit. 17 In the present study, the aucROC values (0.60-0.72) for the CBCT assessment were low, indicating a weak validity in diagnosing a misfit. The results of the multivariate logistic regression support the lower accuracy of CBCT images in diagnosing a misfit, since the chances of correctly diagnosing a fit restoration were higher than for a restoration with a gap of any size.…”

The advantages and disadvantages of biodentine: Satisfactory mechanical properties and radiopacity not meeting ISO standard

“…Therefore, a new formulation named Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur, France) has been lunched recently 25,26,27 . It contains calcium silicate, calcium carbonate, zirconium oxide instead of bismuth oxide added to improve material's radiopacity and calcium chloride added in liquid component to reduce its setting time 13,14 . Biodentine is considered as superior to MTA due to higher biocompatibility of zirconium oxide in comparison to bismuth oxide and zirconium ability to increase material's toughness 16,21,29 .…”

Effect of image sharpening on radiographic image quality

“…(Brettle, 2011) Liedke et al came to a similar conclusion when studying marginal adaptation of metal restorations with image processing. Liedke et al stated: (Liedke, 2015) "Original non-filtered images should be preferred for the assessment of teeth with metal restorations when considering their higher accuracy. High enhancement filters and inversion, particularly, should be avoided in digital images, especially when metal crowns are present.…”

“…Although, this issue has been discussed in the dental, medical and veterinarian literature, (Schweitzer, 2010) (Brettle, 2011) (Liedke, 2015) (Tan, 1997) (Oestmann, 1991) (Solomon, 1991) (Jiménez, 2009) (Drost, 2008) little is known about the extent of overshoot artifact created by USM filters on image quality parameters such as contrast resolution, spatial resolution, dynamic range and noise. In addition a series of processing tools are usually made available to the digital dental user.…”

“…In summarizing this review, the capture and processing of radiographic images may contain artifacts that could reduce the diagnostic value of dental radiographs. (Schweitzer, 2010) (Brettle, 2011) (Liedke, 2015) (Tan, 1997) (Oestmann, 1991) (Solomon, 1991) (Jiménez, 2009) (Drost, 2008) However, the effects of image processing on radiographic image quality of various sensors have not been studied. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of image sharpening on the 4 quality parameters described above, as well as overshoot.…”