The Effects of Imaging Enhancement Tools in the Detection of Horizontal Root Fractures

Barayan, Mohammed; Nasseh, Ibrahim; Geha, Hassem; Noujeim, Marcel

doi:10.7860/jcdr/2017/26775.10490

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results compare favorably to similar studies where no single image enhancement applied in the determination of vertical root fractures was superior, 25,26 and another study in which no single digital enhancement was better than the original image in determining alveolar bone loss. 27 Similarly, Nascimiento et al 28 found altering brightness and contrast did not improve diagnosis of interproximal caries.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Accuracy of dental calculus detection using digital radiography and image manipulation

Hyer

Deas

Palaiologou

et al. 2020

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to determine if image enhancement improves a clinician's ability to identify the presence of calculus on digital radiographs. Methods: Seventy-one hopeless teeth were collected from 34 patients. Teeth were stained with 1% methylene blue, the largest interproximal calculus deposit was scored, and photographs of each interproximal root surface were taken. The surface area of calculus deposit was determined as a percentage of the total interproximal root surface area. Digital radiographs of teeth taken before extraction were modified using the following enhancements: auto-contrast, emboss, invert, and sharpen. Radiographic presence of calculus was determined by two examiners. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each examiner and enhancement. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to compare differences between the image enhancements in the detection of dental calculus. The kappa statistic was used to compare ratings between examiners. Results: None of the enhanced images were statistically superior to original images in identifying radiographic calculus (P > 0.05). The average sensitivity of digital radiography was 50%, average specificity was 82.2%, PPV was 94%, and NPV 23.2%. A threshold of >30% of interproximal root surface covered with calculus and increasing size of deposits were associated with improved detection (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Digital enhancements do not significantly improve radiographic detection of dental calculus. As area of calculus on the root surface and size of calculus deposits increased, sensitivity of detection also increased. K E Y W O R D S dental calculus; periodontal diseases; prognosis; radiography, dental, digital 1 INTRODUCTION Dental calculus has long been studied in its connection with periodontal disease. Calculus is essentially calcified dental plaque comprised of mainly organic components attached to the tooth cuticle, root undercuts, and directly to the tooth surface 1,2 and acts as a plaque retentive feature. The presence of calculus extends the sphere of

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Accuracy of dental calculus detection using digital radiography and image manipulation

Hyer

Deas

Palaiologou

et al. 2020

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, studies have shown conflicting results regarding the impact of this tool on the diagnostic accuracy of digital images in endodontics. Barayan et al, showed no significant impact on the diagnosis of vertical root fractures ( 28 ). Also, Ferreira et al showed that using the filter (termed contrast in this study) tool in enhancing CBCT images did not influence the diagnosis of vertical root fractures in teeth with metal posts ( 27 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apparently, the quality of radiographic images is fundamental in endodontics, as it allows more accurate interpretation of the radiographic images. Consequently, many studies investigated the impact of images enhancement on observers’ ability to more accurately interpret radiographic images in different endodontic scenarios ( 17 - 28 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usage of Image-enhancement’ Tools When Reading Radiographs Taken During Root-Canals Treatments’ Procedures

Madarati¹

2020

Turk Endod J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed at exploring the usage of radiographic image-enhancement tools in Saudi dental practice when interpreting radiographs taken for root-canal-treatments’ (RCTs) procedures and the influencing factors. Methods: An online survey including questions related mainly to the usage of images enhancement tools and the reasons for no or low frequently usage was constructed. The survey was sent to 550 general dentists (GDs), randomly selected from the Saudi Dental Register, and all endodontists (185) in Saudi Arabia using the Google-Drive tool. A reminder email was sent two months later to encourage none-respondents to complete the survey. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square and Linear-by-Linear Association tests at p=0.05. Results: While the highest percentage of GDs (48.3%) never used the colour-coded tool, the highest percentage of endodontists (46.1%) used it sometimes (P<0.001). The majority (84.2%) used the contrast tool either generally (67.8%) or sometimes (16.4%) (P<0.001); with more endodontists (77.55%) than GDs (63.1%) (P=0.011). As participants experience decreased and the weekly performed cases increased, the trend of using this tool increased (P<0.05). While most GDs (67.6%) either never (46%) or few-times (21.6%) used the highlight tool, most endodontists (56.9%) either used it generally (34.4%) or sometimes (22.5%) (P<0.001). The majority (82.3%) were using the magnification tool either generally (55.1%) or sometimes (27.2%). The highest percentage (36.1%) was generally using the negative-view tool (P=0.045); with more endodontists (63.7%) than GDs (20.8%) (P<0.001). While “I don’t know how to use it” was the dominant reason reported by GDs for not using most of the tools, lack of time was the dominant reason reported by endodontists (P≤0.001). Conclusion: The contrast and magnification were the most common used image-enhancement tools in Saudi dental practice. Endodontists reported greater preferences on using all images-enhancement tools than GDs. Unawareness and lack of time were the dominant reasons for not using the tools reported by GDs and endodontists, respectively. Further studies are required to determine the exact application for each tool and to investigate the impact of all image-enhancement tools on their diagnostic accuracy.

show abstract

“…Barayan, et al [44] concluded that there is no significant difference between digitally enhanced and non-enhanced periapical images in detection of HRFs. Additionally they reported that there is no significant difference between endodontists and oral radiologists in detection of such fractures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Digital Periapical Radiography in Determining Horizontal Root Fractures: An In-vitro Comparative Study

Hashemnia¹,

Jahadi²,

Shaygannia³

et al. 2018

Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objective: Diagnosis of Horizontal Root Fractures (HRF) is based on clinical and radiographic documents. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of digital Periapical Radiographs (PSP) with different angulations in different locations and Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) in the detection of HRF in central and lateral maxillary incisors. Materials and Methods: For this experimental study, 60 human central and lateral maxillary incisors were selected and were divided into 4 groups and were numbered. Root fractures were created by using mechanical force in the apical third, middle and cervical part of roots in the groups 1 to 3. The last group was considered as a control group without any fractures. The two fragments from each tooth were relocated with super glue. Then, the radiographic images of all the teeth were taken using digital PSP and CBCT methods. Afterward, two oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the images separately. The data were subjected to specificity and sensitivity for each radiographic technique. The kappa statistics were used for assessing the agreement between observers. The Significance level was considered as P<0/05. Results: CBCT method had higher specificity and sensitivity in the detection of HRF compared to PSP. Kappa value for inter-observer agreement in HRF was 0/89 for CBCT and 0/725 for PSP. Conclusion: CBCT outperformed the PSP method in detecting simulated HRF. CBCT should be used as the reliable imaging method for the diagnosis of HRF.

show abstract

The Effects of Imaging Enhancement Tools in the Detection of Horizontal Root Fractures

Cited by 5 publications

References 32 publications

Accuracy of dental calculus detection using digital radiography and image manipulation

Accuracy of dental calculus detection using digital radiography and image manipulation

Usage of Image-enhancement’ Tools When Reading Radiographs Taken During Root-Canals Treatments’ Procedures

Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Digital Periapical Radiography in Determining Horizontal Root Fractures: An In-vitro Comparative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About