THE INDICATIONS FOR DENTAL VOLUMETRIC TOMOGRAPHY IN A TURKISH POPULATION SAMPLE

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the indications prescriptions performed in İzmir Kâtip Çelebi University, Faculty of Dentistry and to examine the age and gender distribution of the patients. Material and Method: In this study, 470 dental volumetric QR, Verona, Italy) obtained from patients who attended to İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Faculty of Dentistry for their dental problems between October 2012 and October 2013 were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Out of 470 patients, 243 were female and 227 were male, whose ages ranged from 6-73 years (mean= 32.56). The major indications for dental volumetric tomography were for the evaluation of the impacted teeth with a percentage of 32.13 %, which was followed by the examination of bone pathologies like cysts and tumors (23.62 %), the assessment for implant planning (21.49 %), and the evaluation of orthodontic anomalies and sinus pathologies respectively. Conclusions: Dental volumetric tomography has become an indispensable diagnostic tool in clinical practice for many professions where two-dimensional radiography remains limited in many cases

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dental volumetric tomography, indication, radiography

BİR TÜRK ÖRNEKLEM GRUBUNDA DENTAL VOLÜMETRİK TOMOGRAFİ ENDİKASYONLARI

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; İzmir Kâtip Çelebi Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi’ndeki diş hekimlerinin dental volümetrik tomografi isteme nedenleri ve bu isteklerin bölüm, yaş ve cinsiyete göre dağılımlarının incelenmesidir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmada, Ekim 2012-Ekim 2013 tarihleri arasında İzmir Katip Çelebi Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi Kliniğinde dental volümetrik tomografi(NewTom 5G, QR, Verona, Italy) çekilmiş olan, toplam 470 hastanın bilgileri retrospektif olarak tarandı.

Bulgular: 243’ü kadın, 227’si erkek toplam 470 hastanın yaşlarının 6-73 arasında değiştiği ve ortalamasının 32,56 yıl olduğu belirlendi. En fazla isteğin (%32,13) gömülü dişlerin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla yapıldığı saptandı. Tümör ve kist gibi patolojilerin değerlendirilmesi (%23,62), implant planması (%21,49), ortodontik amaçlı istekler ve sinüs patolojilerinin değerlendirilmesi de başlıca diğer istek nedenleri olarak saptandı.

Sonuç: DVT klinik pratikte iki boyutlu radyografilerin sınırlı kaldığı pek çok vakada klinisyenler için vazgeçilmez bir teşhis aracı haline gelmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• dental volümetrik tomografi, endikasyon, radyografi

Kaynakça

1. Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Yang J. Diagnostic Validity (or Acuity) of 2d Ccd Versus 3d Cbct- Images for Assessing Periodontal Breakdown. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;104:395-401.
2. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What Is Cone-Beam Ct and How Does It Work? Dent Clin North Am 2008;52:707-30, v.
3. Grőndahl HG, Huumonen S. Radiographic Manifestations of Periapical Inflammatory Lesions. Endod Topics . 2004;8:55–67.
4. Harorlı A, Akgül, H.M. , Dağistan, S. Diş Hekimliği Radyolojisi. 1 ed. Erzurum; 2006.324-5. 5. Güven Y, Aktören O, Gençay Görüntülemesinde
5. Dentomaksillofasiyal
6. Kullanılan Üç Boyutlu Bilgisayarlı Tomografi
7. Sistemleri. 2008;15:159-64.
8. Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam Ct of the Head and Neck, Part 2: Clinical Applications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1285-92.

9. Daly MJ, Siewerdsen JH, Moseley DJ, Jaffray DA, Irish JC. Intraoperative Cone-Beam Ct for Guidance of Head and Neck Surgery: Assessment of Dose and Image Quality Using a C-Arm Prototype. Med Phys 2006;33:3767-80.
10. Khoury A, Whyne CM, Daly M, Moseley D, Bootsma G, Skrinskas T, et al. Intraoperative Cone-Beam Ct for Correction of Periaxial Malrotation of the Femoral Shaft: A Surface-Matching Approach. Med Phys 2007;34:1380-7.
11. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical Applications of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Dental Practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006;72:75- 80.
12. Büyük SK, Ramoğlu Sİ. Ortodontik Teşhiste Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi. Sağ Bil Derg 2011;20:227-34
13. Hidalgo-Rivas JA, Theodorakou C, Carmichael F, Murray B, Payne M, Horner K. Use of Cone Beam Ct in Children and Young People in Three United Kingdom Dental Hospitals. Int J Paediatr Dent 2013(epub ahead of print).
14. Silva MA, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Bumann A, Visser H, Hirsch E. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Routine Orthodontic Treatment Planning: A Radiation Dose Evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:640 e1-5.
15. Mason C, Papadakou P, Roberts GJ. The Radiographic Localization of Impacted Maxillary Canines: A Comparison of Methods. Eur J Orthod 2001;23:25-34.
16. Lai CS, Bornstein MM, Mock L, Heuberger BM, Dietrich T, Katsaros C. Impacted Maxillary Canines and Root Resorptions of Neighbouring Teeth: A Radiographic Analysis Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography. Eur J Orthod 2013;35:529-38.
17. Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro M, Maruoka Y, Ohbayashi N, et al. A Comparative Study of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Radiography in Assessing the Topographic Relationship between the Mandibular Canal and Impacted Third Molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103:253-9.
18. Bayrak S, Dalci K, Sari S. Case Report: Evaluation of Supernumerary Teeth with Computerized Tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005;100:e65-9.
19. Harris D, Buser D, Dula K, Grondahl K, Haris D, Jacobs R, et al. E.A.O. Guidelines Fo the Use of Diagnostic Imaging in Implant Dentistry. A Consensus Workshop Organized by the European Association for Osseointegration in Trinity College Dublin. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:566-70.
20. Widmann G, Bale RJ. Accuracy in Computer-Aided Implant Surgery--a Review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:305-13.
21. Lofthag-Hansen S, Grondahl K, Ekestubbe A. Cone- Beam Ct for Preoperative Implant Planning in the Posterior Mandible: Visibility of Anatomic Landmarks. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009;11:246-55.
22. Jabero M, Sarment DP. Advanced Surgical Guidance Technology: A Review. Implant Dent 2006;15:135-42.
23. Widmann G, Widmann R, Widmann E, Jaschke W, Bale R. Use of a Surgical Navigation System for Ct- Guided Template Production. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:72-8.
24. Sarment DP, Sukovic P, Clinthorne N. Accuracy of Implant Placement with a Stereolithographic Surgical Guide. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:571-7.
25. Kramer FJ, Baethge C, Swennen G, Rosahl S. Navigated Vs. Conventional Implant Insertion for Maxillary Single Tooth Replacement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:60-8.
26. Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3 ed. Los Angeles, California: Mosby Elsevier; 2007.38-9.
27. Ganz SD. Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing Applications Using Ct and Cone Beam Ct Scanning Technology. Dent Clin North Am 2008;52:777-808, vii.
28. White SC PM. Oral Radiology Principles and Interpretation. Edition 6. ed. Los Angeles, California: Mosby Elsevier; 2009.225-37.
29. Kau CH, Bozic M, English J, Lee R, Bussa H, Ellis RK. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography of the Maxillofacial Region--an Update. Int J Med Robot 2009;5:366-80.
30. Guerrero ME, Jacobs R, Loubele M, Schutyser F, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. State-of-the-Art on Cone Beam Ct Imaging for Preoperative Planning of Implant Placement. Clin Oral Investig 2006;10:1-7.
31. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR. Cone-Beam Computerized Tomography (Cbct) Imaging of the Oral and Maxillofacial Region: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;38:609-25.
32. Miller RJ, Bier J. Surgical Navigation in Oral Implantology. Implant Dent 2006;15:41-7.
33. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in Measurement of Distance Using Limited Cone-Beam Computerized Tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:228-31. 32. Azari A, Nikzad S. Computer-Assisted
34. Implantology: Historical Background and Potential
35. Outcomes-a Review. Int J Med Robot 2008;4:95- 104.
36. Kim KD, Ruprecht A, Jeon KJ, Park CS. Personal Computer-Based Three-Dimensional Computed Tomographic Images of the Teeth for Evaluating Supernumerary or Ectopically Impacted Teeth. Angle Orthod 2003;73:614-21.
37. Marmulla R, Wortche R, Muhling J, Hassfeld S. Geometric Accuracy of the Newtom 9000 Cone Beam Ct. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005;34:28-31.
38. Bender IB. Factors Influencing the Radiographic Appearance of Bony Lesions. J Endod 1997;23:5- 14.
39. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What Is Cone-Beam Ct and How Does It Work? Dent Clin North Am 2008;52:707-30.
40. Kau CH, Richmond S, Palomo JM, Hans MG. Three- Dimensional Tomography 2005;32:282-93. Beam Orthodontics. J Orthod
41. Rigolone M, Pasqualini D, Bianchi L, Berutti E, Bianchi SD. Vestibular Surgical Access to the Palatine Root of the Superior First Molar: "Low- Dose Cone-Beam" Ct Analysis of the Pathway and Its Anatomic Variations. J Endod 2003;29:773-5.