Comparison of periapical radiography, panoramic, and cone-beam CT in the detection of dental caries in dog teeth

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of panoramic, periapical and two different Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) devices in the detection of dental caries of dog teeth ex vivo. A total of 880 teeth were investigated, 33 of which were with caries, whereas; 33 healthy teeth were the controls. Periapical, panoramic and CBCT scans were made for the assessment of the teeth. All images were evaluated separately by two observers experienced in image interpretation. The presence or absence of occlusal caries was scored using a 5-point scale. Kappa values were calculated to assess intra and interobserver agreement. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to compare the effectiveness of different imaging methods in the detection of dental caries. For both observers, the order of success of the image sets in the estimation of the caries tooth was CBCT Morita, CBCT Iluma, periapical and panoramic radiograph (Area Under Curve (AUC): 0.929, 0.882, 0.861, and 0.704 for observer 1, AUC: 0.927, 0.896, 0.875, and 0.693 for observer 2, respectively). CBCT was found to be the best imaging method for the ex vivo detection of caries in dog teeth. In addition, panoramic images performed worse than all other modalities. 

Keywords

• CBCT
• panoramic radiography
• periapical radiography
• dental caries
• dogs

Köpek dişlerindeki çürüklerin tespitinde periapikal, panoramik ve konik ışınlı BT görüntülerinin karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, ex vivo olarak köpeklerde diş çürüğü tespitinde panoramik, periapikal ve iki farklı Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT) cihazının etkinliğini karşılaştırmaktır. Toplam 880 diş değerlendirilmiş olup 33 çürük diş tespit edilmiştir. Sağlıklı dişlerden rastgele 33’ü seçilerek kontrol grubu oluşturulmuştur. Çürüklerin radyografik olarak değerlendirilmesi için periapikal, panoramik ve KIBT yöntemleri kullanılarak görüntüler elde edildi. Tüm görüntüler, görüntü yorumlamada deneyimli iki gözlemci tarafından ayrı ayrı değerlendirildi. Okluzal çürüğün varlığı veya yokluğu, 5 puanlık bir ölçek kullanılarak puanlandı. Kappa değerleri, gözlemci içi ve gözlemciler arası uyumu değerlendirmek için hesaplandı. Diş çürüğü tespitinde farklı görüntüleme yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması için ROC analizi yapıldı. Her iki gözlemci için, çürük dişin tespitinde görüntüleme yöntemlerinin başarı sırası KIBT Morita, KIBT Iluma, periapikal ve panoramik radyograf olarak bulunmuştur. (1. gözlemci için Area Under Curve (AUC): 0.929, 0.882, 0.861 ve 0.704, 2. gözlemci için AUC: 0.927, 0.896, 0.875 ve 0.693). KIBT’ın köpek dişlerinde çürüklerin ex vivo tespiti için en iyi görüntüleme yöntemi olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, panoramik görüntüler diğer tüm yöntemlerden daha kötü performans göstermiştir. 

Keywords

• Diş çürüğü
• köpek
• KIBT
• panoramik radyograf
• periapikal radyograf

References

1. 1. Haiter-Neto F, Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E (2008): Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography scans compared with intraoral image modalities for detection of caries lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 37, 18–22.
2. 2. Hale FA (1998): Dental Caries in the Dog. J Vet Dent, 15, 79–83.
3. 3. Kalathingal SM, Mol A, Tyndall DA, et al (2007): In vitro assessment of cone beam local computed tomography for proximal caries detection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 104, 699–704.
4. 4. Lee G-S, Kim J-S, Seo Y-S, et al (2013): Effective dose from direct and indirect digital panoramic units. Imaging Sci Dent, 43, 77–84.
5. 5. Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, et al (2015): Effective dose of dental CBCT—a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 44, 20140197.
6. 6. Pavlica Z, Erjavec V, Erzen D, et al (2003): A full-mouth radiographic survey of periodontal bone loss in dogs. Acta Vet Brno, 72, 391–398.
7. 7. Rathore S, Tyndall D, Wright J, et al (2012): Ex vivo comparison of Galileos cone beam CT and intraoral radiographs in detecting occlusal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 41, 489–493.
8. 8. Riggs GG, Arzi B, Cissell DD, et al (2016): Clinical application of cone-beam computed tomography of the rabbit head: part 1 – normal dentition. Front Vet Sci, 3, 93.

9. 9. Ritchie C (2014): Class I restoration of maxillary first molar caries in a dog. J Vet Dent, 31, 66–9.
10. 10. Roza MR, Silva LAF, Barriviera M, et al (2011): Cone beam computed tomography and intraoral radiography for diagnosis of dental abnormalities in dogs and cats. J Vet Sci, 12, 387–392.
11. 11. Senel B, Kamburoglu K, Ucok O, et al (2010): Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities in detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol, 39, 501–511.
12. 12. Soukup JW, Drees R, Koenig LJ, et al (2015): Comparison of the diagnostic image quality of the canine maxillary dentoalveolar structures obtained by cone beam computed tomography and 64-multidetector row computed tomography. J Vet Dent, 32, 80–86.
13. 13. Tsuchida R, Araki K, Okano T. (2007): Evaluation of a limited cone-beam volumetric imaging system: comparison with film radiography in detecting incipient proximal caries. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 104, 412–416.
14. 14. Van Thielen B, Siguenza F, Hassan B (2012): Cone beam computed tomography in veterinary dentistry. J Vet Dent, 29, 27–34. 15. Verstraete F, Kass P, Terpak C (1998): Diagnostic value of full-mouth radiography in dogs. Am J Vet Res, 59, 686–691.
15. 16. Young SM, Lee JT, Hodges RJ, et al (2009): A comparative study of high-resolution cone beam computed tomography and charge-coupled device sensors for detecting caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 38, 445–451.