Evaluation of the visibility of the materials used in furcation perforation in imaging devices

Abstract

Amaç: Projeksiyon geometrisi ve anatomik yapıların süperpozisyonu sorunları nedeniyle furkasyon perforasyonlarının tanısında iki boyutlu radyografik tekniklerin kullanılması zordur. Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT) ile görüntüleme, süperpozisyonlarının olmaması ve magnifikasyon problemi olmaması nedeniyle konvansiyonel görüntüleme araçlarından daha hassas ve doğru bir tanı aracıdır.

Gereç ve Yöntemler:Çalışmada 114 alt molar diş seçilmiştir. Perforasyon bölgesini tamir amaçlı Biodentin, BioAggregate, BioCeramix, MTA ve Endosequence yerleştirilmiştir. Periapikal radyografiler fosfor plaklarla Sorodex Digora Optime ile, diğer radyografik görüntüler Planmeca Dixi 3 CCD kullanılarak, KIBT görüntüleri ise Morita Veraviewepocs 3D R100 kullanılarak elde edilmiştir. Bir endodontist ve iki ağız, diş ve çene radyolojisi uzmanı KIBT görüntülerini ve periapikal radyografileri incelemiştir.

Bulgular:MTA ve Biodentine düşük görüntü kalitesine, Bioaggregate ve Endosequence yüksek görüntü kalitesine sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Morita Veraviewepocs 3D R100 en yüksek keskinlik değerini gösterirken, Sorodex Digora Optime ve Planmeca Dixi 3 cihazları arasında fark gözlenmemiştir..

Sonuçlar:Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT) ile görüntüleme endodontik furkasyon perforasyonlarının tanısında iki boyutlu yöntemlere göre daha üstün bir yöntemdir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Keywords

• Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi
• endodonti
• furkasyon defekti

Evaluation of Visibility in Imaging Devices of Materials Used in Furcation Perforation

Abstract

Background:Two-dimensional radiographic techniques are difficult to diagnose in the diagnosis of furcation perforations because of the projection geometry and the anatomical structures’superposition problems. Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) is more accurate diagnostic modality than conventional imaging methods due to the lack of superposition and lack of magnification.

Methods:In this study, 114 lower molar teeth were selected. Biodentin, BioAggregate, BioCeramix, MTA and Endosequence were placed to repair the perforation zone. Periapical radiographs were obtained with Sorodex Digora Optime with phosphorous plaques, other radiographic images were obtained using Planmeca Dixi 3 CCD, while KIBT images were obtained using Morita Veraviewepocs 3D R100. An endodontist and two dentomaxillofacial radiology specialists examined the CBCT images and periapical radiographs.

Results:MTA and Biodentine were found to have low image quality, Bioaggregate and Endosequence high image quality. Morita Veraviewepocs 3D R100 showed the highest sharpness, but no difference was observed between Sorodex Digora Optime and Planmeca Dixi 3 devices.

Conclusions:Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) imaging is a superior method in the diagnosis of endodontic furcation perforations compared to two-dimensional methods.

Keywords:Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, endodontics, furcation defects

Keywords

• Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
• endodontics
• furcation defects

References

1. 1. Hamad HA, Tordık PA Mcclanahan SB. Furcation perforation repair comparing gray and white MTA: a dye extraction study. J Endod. 2006 Apr;32(4):337-40.
2. 2.Vanni JR, Della-Bona A, Figueiredo JA, Pedro G, Voss D, Kopper PM. Radiographic evaluation of furcal perforations sealed with different materials in dogs’ teeth. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19: 421-425.
3. 3. Hashem AA, Hassanien EE. ProRoot MTA, MTA-Angelus and IRM to repair large furcation perforations: sealability study. J Endod. 2008;34:59-61.
4. 4. Fuss Z, Trope M. (1996). Root perforations: classification and treatment choices based on prognostic factors. Endod Dent Traumatol 12:255-264.
5. 5. Sinai IH. Endodontic perforations: their prognosis and treatment. J Am Dent Assoc 1977;95:90–5.
6. 6. Imura N, Otani SM, Hata G, Toda T, Zuolo ML. Sealing ability of composite resin placed over calcium hydroxide and calcium sulphate plugs in the repair of furcation perforations in mandibular molars: a study in vitro. Int Endod J. 1998 Mar;31(2):79-84.
7. 7.Prati, biyoseramikler.2017 Raghavendra SS, Jadhav GR, Gathani KM, Kotadia P. Bioceramics in endodontics – a review. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent. 2017; 51(3 Suppl 1): S128–S137.
8. 8. Kamburoglu K, Kolsuz E, Murat S, Eren H, Yüksel S, Paksoy CS. Assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant and periodontal defects using a CBCT system with and without the application of metal artifact reduction mode. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20130176.

9. 9. Aljehani YA. Diagnostic applications of cone-beam CT for periodontal diseases. Int J Dent. 2014;2014:865079.10.
10. 10.Petersson A, Axelsson S, Davidson T, et al. Radiological diagnosis of periapical bone tissue lesions in endodontics: a systematic review. Int Endod J 2012;45:783–801.
11. 11. Braun X, Ritter L, Jervøe-Storm PM, Frentzen M. Diagnostic accuracy of CBCT for periodontal lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18:1229-1236.
12. 12. du Bois A. Kardachi B, Bartold P. Is there a role for the use of volumetric cone beam computed tomography in periodontics? Aust Dent J. 2012;57:103-108.
13. 13. Küçükeşmen HC, Küçükeşmen Ç. Sınıf-V Hibrid Kompozit Rezin Restorasyonların Mikrosızıntı Düzeylerinin Karşılaştırılması.Balıkesir Sağlık Bil Derg Cilt:1 Sayı:3 Aralık 2012.
14. 14. Koçak MM, Er Ö, Darendeliler Yaman S. Furkasyon perforasyonu tedavisinde mineral trioksitaggregat kullanımı; olgu bildirimi Atatürk Üniv. Diş Hek. Fak. Derg. Supplement:1, Page:91-94, 2006
15. 15. Arens DE, Torabinejad M. Repair of furcal perforations with mineral trioxide aggregate: two case reports. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1996; 82: 84-8
16. 16. Rotstein I, Simon JH. Endodontic-Periodontal interrelationships. In: Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC, editors. Endodontics 6. 6th ed. Hamilton: BC Decker; 2008. pp. 638–59.
17. 17. Ford TR, Torabinejad M, McKendry DJ, Hong CU, Kariyawasam SP. Use of mineral trioxide aggregate for repair of furcal perforations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995 Jun;79(6):756-63.
18. 18. Gençoğlu N, Yıldırım T. Furkasyon Perforasyonlarında Kullanılan MTA, Super-EBA ve Amalgamın Mikrosızıntısının İncelenmesi. Atatürk Üniv.Diş Hek.Fak.Derg. 2003-2004 13(3),14(1):7-12.
19. 19. Jeevani E, Jayaprakash T, Bolla N, Vemuri S, Sunil CR, Kalluru RS. "Evaluation of sealing ability of MM-MTA, Endosequence, and biodentine as furcation repair materials: UV spectrophotometric analysis". J Conserv Dent 2014;17:340-3
20. 20. Tagger M, Katz A “A standard for radiopacity of root-end (retrograde) filling materials is urgently needed,” International Endodontic Journal, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 260–264, 2004
21. 21. Bender IB, Seltzer S. Kemikteki deneysel lezyonların röntgenografik ve doğrudan gözlemi: I. 1961. J Endod 2003; 29: 702–706
22. 22. Estrela C, Bueno MR, Leles CR, Azevedo B, Azevedo JR. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography and panoramic and periapical radiography for detection of apical periodontitis. J. Endod. 2008;34(3):273-9.
23. 23. SEDENTEXCT (2012) European Commission, Radiation Protection N 172: Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Evidence based guidelines. A report prepared by the SEDENTECT Project, 2011.
24. 24. Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographic 2004;24:1679-91
25. 25. Tanalp J, Karapınar M, Dölekoğlu S, Kayahan MB. Comparison of the Radiopacities of Different Root-End Filling and Repair Materials , Hindawi Publishing Corporation The Scientific World Journal Volume 2013, Article ID 594950, 4 pages
26. 26. M. Tanomaru-Filho, G. F. da Silva, M. A. H. Duarte, M. Gonc¸alves, and J. M. G. Tanomaru, “Radiopacity evaluation of root-end filling materials by digitization of images,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 376–379, 2008.
27. 27. Helvacioglu-Yigit, D., Demirturk Kocasarac, H., Bechara, B., & Noujeim, M. Evaluation and Reduction of Artifacts Generated by 4 Different Root-end Filling Materials by Using Multiple Cone-beam Computed Tomography Imaging Settings. J Endod. 2016 Feb;42(2):307-14.
28. 28. Stavropoulos A, Wenzel A. Accuracy of cone beam dental CT, periapical digital and conventional film radiography for the detection of periapical lesions. An ex vivo study in pig jaws. Clin Oral Invest (2007) 11:101–106
29. 29. Adel M, Tofangchiha M, Yeganeh LA, Javadi A, Khojasteh AA, Majd NM. Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional periapical radiography in detecting strip root perforations. J Int Oral Health. 2016 Jan;8(1):75-9
30. 30. Eskandarloo A, Saati S, Ardakani MP, Jamalpour M, Gholi Mezerji NM, Akheshteh V. Diagnostic Accuracy of Three Cone Beam Computed Tomography Systems and Periapical Radiography for Detection of Fenestration Around Dental Implants. Contemp Clin Dent. 2018 Jul-Sep;9(3):376-381.
31. 31.Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B. Visualisation of the mandibular canal by different radiographic techniques. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1992, 3(2), 90–97.