1968
DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(68)90228-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of a roentgenographic contrast medium in the differential diagnosis of periapical lesions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

1970
1970
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If the medium for some reason had to be in-jected through the mucosa, the correlation was somewhat poorer. Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), however, using a similar technique, found no correlation between the characteristics of the radiopaque image and the histologic diagnosis, Thus it may be concluded that the radiographic diagnosis of periapical lesions is still doubtful, except when using a contrast medium injected through the root canal as reported by Forsberg 6 Hagglund (1959). However, this method, because of the controversial findings by Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), has to be further clarified.…”
mentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If the medium for some reason had to be in-jected through the mucosa, the correlation was somewhat poorer. Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), however, using a similar technique, found no correlation between the characteristics of the radiopaque image and the histologic diagnosis, Thus it may be concluded that the radiographic diagnosis of periapical lesions is still doubtful, except when using a contrast medium injected through the root canal as reported by Forsberg 6 Hagglund (1959). However, this method, because of the controversial findings by Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), has to be further clarified.…”
mentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), however, using a similar technique, found no correlation between the characteristics of the radiopaque image and the histologic diagnosis, Thus it may be concluded that the radiographic diagnosis of periapical lesions is still doubtful, except when using a contrast medium injected through the root canal as reported by Forsberg 6 Hagglund (1959). However, this method, because of the controversial findings by Cunningham 6 Penick (1968), has to be further clarified. Brynolf (1967), in an investigation of 292 maxillary incisors, showed that it is possible radiographically to distinguish between histologically normal and pathologic cases, and among the latter it is possible to distinguish between groups of different degrees of severity.…”
mentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Smith & Woods (1983) tested a calcium hydroxide–diatrizoate paste. Diatrozoates are substances that have been used previously to aid in the diagnosis of periapical lesions (Forsberg & Hagglund 1960, Cunninghan & Penick 1968) and to elucidate the pathways of anaesthetic injections (Berns & Sadove 1962, Galbreath 1970). A commercially available soluble iodine compound (Renograffing) containing aqueous solutions of 66% diatrizoate meglumine and 10% sodium diatrizoate was mixed with calcium hydroxide powder and compared with a barium sulphatecalcium hydroxide paste.…”
Section: Calcium Hydroxide and Other Substancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous noninvasive diagnostic attempts such as evaluating periapical radiographs (2), contrast media (4), and Papanicolou smears (5) have all been shown to be unreliable. An attempt has been made to use electrophoresis in the differentiation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%