Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 14(7)2024 Apr 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38611679

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Periapical lesions of teeth are typically evaluated using periapical X-rays (PA) or cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT); however, ultrasound imaging (US) can also be used to detect bone defects. A comparative analysis is necessary to establish the diagnostic accuracy of US for the detection of periapical lesions in comparison with PA and CBCT. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the measurement precision of US against PA and CBCT in detecting periapical lesions. METHODS: This study included 43 maxillary and mandibular teeth with periapical lesions. All teeth were examined clinically, radiographically, and ultrasonographically. Observers evaluated and measured the periapical lesions on CBCT, PA, and US images. RESULTS: The comparison of lesion size showed that it differs significantly between the different methods of examination. A statistically significant difference was found between CBCT and US (mean difference = 0.99 mm, 95% CI [0.43-1.55]), as well as between CBCT and PA (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI [0.17-1.05]). No difference was found between the US and PA methods (p = 0.193). CONCLUSION: US cannot replace PA radiography in detecting pathologies but it can accurately measure and characterize periapical lesions with minimal radiation exposure. CBCT is the most precise and radiation-intensive method so it should only be used for complex cases.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA