Elsevier

Journal of Endodontics

Volume 34, Issue 1, January 2008, Pages 87-89
Journal of Endodontics

Basic research—technology
Use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography to Identify Root Canal Systems In Vitro

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.10.016Get rights and content

Abstract

This study investigated the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as a diagnostic tool for identifying root canal systems (RCSs) when compared with images obtained by using charged coupled device (CCD) and photostimulable phosphor plate (PSP) digital radiography in vitro. Seventy-two extracted teeth were exposed with CCD, PSP, and CBCT radiography. Specimens included 24 maxillary molars, mandibular premolars, and mandibular incisors each. Tooth-type selections were based on the greater possibility of multiple RCSs. Three board-certified endodontists evaluated CCD and PSP images to determine the number of RCSs. CBCT images were used to establish “ground truth” for the comparisons and were evaluated by a board-certified oral and maxillofacial radiologist who determined the number of RCSs. Descriptive statistical analysis revealed that the endodontists consistently agreed among themselves. When compared with CBCT evaluation, the endodontists, on average, failed to identify 1 or more RCSs in 41% of the teeth with CCD and 40% of the time with PSP. CBCT evaluations identified an average of 3.58 RCSs per maxillary molar, 1.21 per mandibular premolar, and 1.5 per mandibular incisor. Evaluation of CCD images demonstrated an average number of 1.0 RCSs per mandibular incisor, 1.0 per mandibular first premolar, and 3.1 per maxillary molar. Evaluation of PSP images demonstrated an average number of 1.3 RCSs per mandibular incisor, 1.1 per mandibular first premolar, and 3.0 per maxillary molar. In summary, endodontist evaluators with either CCD or PSP methods failed to identify at least 1 RCS in approximately 4 of 10 teeth, which can result in a less optimal healing outcome if a missed RCS is left uninstrumented and unobturated.

Section snippets

Materials and Methods

Seventy-two extracted human teeth, gathered from oral surgery practices and stored at 100% humidity, were collected and randomly inserted into 4 foam arches in groups of 18 teeth each. Each arch consisted of 6 maxillary first molars, 6 mandibular first premolars, and 6 mandibular incisors. Tooth types were selected because of the likelihood of possessing multiple RCSs (12, 13, 14). Specimens were placed in close contact to each other to simulate their natural alignment in a dental arch. An

Results

The percentages of RCSs identified with CCD and PSP images compared with CBCT are listed in Table 1. For CCD, the endodontist evaluators correctly identified the number of RCSs 80%, 78%, and 77% of the time, respectively, when compared with CBCT. For PSP, endodontist evaluators correctly identified the number of RCSs 81%, 76%, and 84% of the time, respectively, when compared with CBCT. The endodontist evaluators missed approximately 1 of 5 RCSs with CCD and PSP when compared with CBCT. The

Discussion

In this study, endodontic evaluators only identified between 76%–84% of RCSs with CCD and PSP digital radiography when compared with the number of RCSs identified by the OMFR with CBCT. For individual teeth, the endodontist evaluators with CCD and PSP methods failed to identify at least 1 or more RCS in at least 4 of 10 teeth, which might decrease the prognosis because RCSs might remain undiscovered. These radiographically undiscovered RCSs might be discovered with the aid of appropriate

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate assistance provided by Drs Edward Grimes, James Dryden, and Ronald Riley, Department of Endodontics, UMKC School of Dentistry.

Cited by (261)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text