Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015;8(Spec Iss 3):77-82.

Diagnostic accuracy of Cone Beam Computed Tomography, conventional and digital radiographs in detecting interproximal caries

Y Safi  1 , N Shamloo Mahmoudi  1 , M M Aghdasi  1 , M Eslami Manouchehri  1 , R Rahimian  2 , S Valizadeh  1 , Z Vasegh  1 , Z Azizi  2
Affiliations

Diagnostic accuracy of Cone Beam Computed Tomography, conventional and digital radiographs in detecting interproximal caries

Y Safi et al. J Med Life. 2015.

Abstract

Presently, various imaging methods are available for the disclosure of proximal caries. Some recent studies have attempted to determine the diagnostic accuracy of available modalities, but they have shown variable results. Aim: This study was carried out to recognize and examine the correctness of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), regular radiographs and the nondirect digital system in the disclosure of interproximal caries. Materials and Method: In this observational tryout study, forty-two extracted non-cavitated, unrestored person molar and premolar teeth were placed in the blocks with proximal surfaces in touch. Then they were appraised by CBCT, formal radiographs and the nondirect digital system for the disclosure of interproximal caries. Four oral and maxillofacial radiologists used a 4-point scale to assess the pictures for the existence or absence of proximal caries. Caries depth was specified by histological examination. The gathered data were assessed by SPSS software using Weighted Kappa and Friedman test. Results: Statistics demonstrated that the accuracy of the indirect digital system was somewhat better than conventional systems. The accuracy of the indirect digital system was better than cone beam system, and this difference was statistically significant. Conclusion: The digital system was better than CBCT in the disclosure of proximal caries. The formal radiography fell in between the two other systems without a statistically significant deviation in detecting caries. Thus, CBCT is not advised to detect proximal caries because of the higher radiation dose.

Keywords: Cone Beam CT; dental caries; diagnosis; digital; radiography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Digital Radiograph
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Conventional Radiograph
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
CBCT Image
Chart 1
Chart 1
Diagnostic accuracy for each method for observers on mesial surface
Chart 2
Chart 2
Diagnostic accuracy for each method for observers on distal surface
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kalathingal SM, Mol A, Tyndall DA, Caplan DJ. In vitro assessment of cone beam local computed tomography for proximal caries detection. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2007;104:699–704. - PubMed
    1. Schneiderman A, Elbaum M, Shultz T, Keem S, Greenebaum M, Driller J. Assessment of dental caries with digital imaging fiber-optic translllumination (DIFOTITM): in vitro Study. Caries Research. 1997;31:103–110. - PubMed
    1. Zhang Zl, Qu XM, Li G, Zhang ZY, Ma XC. The detection accuracies for proximal caries by cone-beam computerized tomography, film, and phosphor plates. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2011;111:103–108. - PubMed
    1. Cheng JG, Zhang ZL, Wang XY, Zhang ZY, Ma XC, Li G. Detection accuracy of proximal caries by phosphor plate and cone-beam computerized tomography images scanned with different resolutions. Clinical oral investigations. 2012;16:1015–1021. - PubMed
    1. Wenzel A. Digital radiography and caries diagnosis. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 1998;27:3–11. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources