Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ

Year 2019, Volume: 29 Issue: 4, 543 - 549, 15.10.2019
https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.578078

Abstract



Amaç: Bu çalışmada,
diş hekimliği fakültemizde Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT)
görüntüleme istek sebeplerinin belirlenmesi, sınıflandırılması ve buna göre
hangi sebeplerin daha yaygın olarak KIBT görüntüleme gerektirdiğinin
incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır.



Gereç ve Yöntem: Erciyes Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği
Fakültesi Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi Anabilim Dalı’na KIBT görüntülemesi
için başvuran hastaların arşiv kayıtlarından alınan 21953 adet KIBT istek formu
retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. İstek yapılan maksillofasiyal bölgeler
(maksilla, mandibula, maksilla-mandibula, temporomandibular eklem, paranazal
sinus) kaydedildi. Bu kayıtlar istek sebepleri olan lezyon, gömülü diş,
implant, travma, ortodonti ve diğer nedenler olarak 1-6 arasında kodlandı.
Hastaların hangi kliniklerden yönlendirildiği, cinsiyet ve yaş dağılımlarına
göre çekilen KIBT sayıları tablo haline getirildi. Veriler tanımlayıcı
istatistik yöntemi ile analiz edildi.



Bulgular: Çalışmaya dahil edilen 21953 KIBT
görüntüsünün %39,39’u erkek, %60,61’i kadın bireylere aittir. Tüm KIBT istek
nedenlerinde implant değerlendirme sebebi %33,38 ile ilk sırada yer aldı.
Sadece mandibuladan yapılan isteklerde gömülü diş sebebi ilk sıradayken sadece
maksillanın görüntülenme nedenlerinde ise implant değerlendirilmesinin ilk
sırada olduğu görüldü. Tüm istek formları içinde lezyon değerlendirmesinin
oranı %12,92 olarak kaydedilirken, gömülü diş değerlendirmesi %32,43, paranazal
sinus değerlendirmesi %4,5 ve TME değerlendirmesi ise %3,82 olarak kaydedildi.



Sonuç: Çalışmanın sonuçları KIBT görüntülenmesinin
en fazla implant planlaması için istendiğini gösterdi. Ayrıca KIBT isteklerinin
bölümlere göre dağılımları hakkında bilgi vermektedir.



Anahtar Kelimeler: Konik
Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi, KIBT, Radyoloji



Reasons
for Requesting Cone Beam Computed Tomography Examination



in
a Faculty of Dentistry



Abstract



Aim: In this study, it is aimed to determine and
categorize the reasons for Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) imaging
requests in our faculty of dentistry; accordingly, to analyze which reasons
require CBCT imaging more often. 



Material and Methods: 21953 CBCT
request forms, obtained from the archive records of the patients who were
admitted to Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Oral and
Maxillofacial Radiology for CBCT imaging, were evaluated retrospectively.
Requested maxillofacial regions (maxilla, mandibula, maxilla-mandibula,
temporomandibular joint, paranasal sinus) were recorded. These records were
coded between 1-6 for the requests, namely lesion, impacted tooth, implant,
trauma, orthodontics, and other causes.
Performed CBCT images are tabulated according to the
clinics requesting the imaging and the distribution of patients in terms of age
and sex. The data were analyzed by descriptive statistics methods.



Results: Of the 21953 CBCT included in the study,
39.39% belongs to male and 60.61% to female individuals. Among all CBCT request
reasons, the evaluation of the implant was placed first with 33.38%. While
among the requests made only from mandibula, the imaging of the impacted tooth
was in the first place, among the requests made only from maxilla the
evaluation of the implant was the most dominant reason. Among all the request
forms, the ratio of lesion evaluation was recorded as 12.92%, while the
impacted tooth evaluation as 32.43%, paranasal sinus evaluation as 4.5%, and
the TME as 3.82%.



Conclusions: The results of the study showed that most
of the CBCT images were requested for implant planning. Additionally the
results provide information about the distribution of requests per clinic.



Keywords: Cone Beam Computed
Tomography, CBCT, Radiology



References

  • 1. White SC. Cone-beam imaging in dentistry. Health Phys. 2008;95:628-37.
  • 2. MacDonald D. Cone‐beam computed tomography and the dentist. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017;8(1):e12178.
  • 3. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am. 2008;52(4):707-30.
  • 4. Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IB. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur radiol. 1998;8(9):1558-64.
  • 5. Patel S, Dawood A, Ford TP, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int Endod J. 2007;40(10):818-30.
  • 6. Whaites E. Dose units and dosimetry. Essentials of dental radiography and radiology 4th ed London: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier. 2007:25-8.
  • 7. Kütük N, Alkan A, Amuk NG, Çoban G. Uyku Apnesinin Tedavisinde Ortognatik Cerrahinin Yeri. Turkiye Klinikleri J Oral Maxillofac Surg-Special Topics 2017;3(3):146-52.
  • 8. Akarslan Z, Peker İ. Bir diş hekimliği fakültesindeki konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi incelemesi istenme nedenleri. Acta Odontol Turc. 2015;32(1):1-6.
  • 9. Ertaş ET, Kalabalık F. The indications for dental volumetric tomography in a turkish population sample. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi.24(2).
  • 10. Neves FS, Souza T, Almeida S, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas D, Bóscolo FN. Correlation of panoramic radiography and cone beam CT findings in the assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41(7):553-7.
  • 11. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, Ganz SD, Hildebolt C, Scarfe WC. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113(6):817-26.
  • 12. Hatcher DC, Dial C, Mayorga C. Cone beam CT for pre-surgical assessment of implant sites. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2003;31(11):825-34.
  • 13. Aps J. Cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: overview of recent literature. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2013;14(3):131-40.
  • 14. Rodríguez G, Abella F, Durán-Sindreu F, Patel S, Roig M. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography in clinical decision making among specialists. Eur Endod J. 2017;43(2):194-9.
  • 15. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen G. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(6):609-25.
  • 16. Horner K, O'Malley L, Taylor K, Glenny A. Guidelines for clinical use of CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;44(1):20140225.
  • 17. Affairs ADACoS. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143(8):899-902.
  • 18. Kamburoğlu K, Kurşun Ş, Akarslan Z. Dental students' knowledge and attitudes towards cone beam computed tomography in Turkey. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(7):439-43.
  • 19. Dölekoğlu S, Fişekçioğlu E, İlgüy M, İlgüy D. The usage of digital radiography and cone beam computed tomography among Turkish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(6):379-84.
Year 2019, Volume: 29 Issue: 4, 543 - 549, 15.10.2019
https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.578078

Abstract

References

  • 1. White SC. Cone-beam imaging in dentistry. Health Phys. 2008;95:628-37.
  • 2. MacDonald D. Cone‐beam computed tomography and the dentist. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017;8(1):e12178.
  • 3. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin North Am. 2008;52(4):707-30.
  • 4. Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IB. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur radiol. 1998;8(9):1558-64.
  • 5. Patel S, Dawood A, Ford TP, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int Endod J. 2007;40(10):818-30.
  • 6. Whaites E. Dose units and dosimetry. Essentials of dental radiography and radiology 4th ed London: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier. 2007:25-8.
  • 7. Kütük N, Alkan A, Amuk NG, Çoban G. Uyku Apnesinin Tedavisinde Ortognatik Cerrahinin Yeri. Turkiye Klinikleri J Oral Maxillofac Surg-Special Topics 2017;3(3):146-52.
  • 8. Akarslan Z, Peker İ. Bir diş hekimliği fakültesindeki konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi incelemesi istenme nedenleri. Acta Odontol Turc. 2015;32(1):1-6.
  • 9. Ertaş ET, Kalabalık F. The indications for dental volumetric tomography in a turkish population sample. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi.24(2).
  • 10. Neves FS, Souza T, Almeida S, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas D, Bóscolo FN. Correlation of panoramic radiography and cone beam CT findings in the assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41(7):553-7.
  • 11. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, Ganz SD, Hildebolt C, Scarfe WC. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113(6):817-26.
  • 12. Hatcher DC, Dial C, Mayorga C. Cone beam CT for pre-surgical assessment of implant sites. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2003;31(11):825-34.
  • 13. Aps J. Cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: overview of recent literature. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2013;14(3):131-40.
  • 14. Rodríguez G, Abella F, Durán-Sindreu F, Patel S, Roig M. Influence of cone-beam computed tomography in clinical decision making among specialists. Eur Endod J. 2017;43(2):194-9.
  • 15. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen G. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(6):609-25.
  • 16. Horner K, O'Malley L, Taylor K, Glenny A. Guidelines for clinical use of CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;44(1):20140225.
  • 17. Affairs ADACoS. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in dentistry: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143(8):899-902.
  • 18. Kamburoğlu K, Kurşun Ş, Akarslan Z. Dental students' knowledge and attitudes towards cone beam computed tomography in Turkey. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(7):439-43.
  • 19. Dölekoğlu S, Fişekçioğlu E, İlgüy M, İlgüy D. The usage of digital radiography and cone beam computed tomography among Turkish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(6):379-84.
There are 19 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Dentistry
Journal Section Araştırma Makalesi
Authors

Mehmet Amuk This is me 0000-0001-6390-7169

Serkan Yılmaz This is me 0000-0001-7149-0324

Publication Date October 15, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 29 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Amuk, M., & Yılmaz, S. (2019). BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(4), 543-549. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.578078
AMA Amuk M, Yılmaz S. BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. October 2019;29(4):543-549. doi:10.17567/ataunidfd.578078
Chicago Amuk, Mehmet, and Serkan Yılmaz. “BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 29, no. 4 (October 2019): 543-49. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.578078.
EndNote Amuk M, Yılmaz S (October 1, 2019) BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 29 4 543–549.
IEEE M. Amuk and S. Yılmaz, “BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ”, Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 543–549, 2019, doi: 10.17567/ataunidfd.578078.
ISNAD Amuk, Mehmet - Yılmaz, Serkan. “BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 29/4 (October 2019), 543-549. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.578078.
JAMA Amuk M, Yılmaz S. BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2019;29:543–549.
MLA Amuk, Mehmet and Serkan Yılmaz. “BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ”. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 29, no. 4, 2019, pp. 543-9, doi:10.17567/ataunidfd.578078.
Vancouver Amuk M, Yılmaz S. BİR DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİNDE KONİK IŞINLI BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ TETKİKİ İSTENMESİNİN SEBEPLERİ. Ata Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2019;29(4):543-9.

Bu eser Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır. Tıklayınız.