Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography in determining gingival thickness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for determining gingival thickness. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Searches were undertaken in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, LIVIVO, and gray literature (Google Scholar and ProQuest) for studies considered eligible according to the following criteria: cross-sectional observational studies, which compared CBCT accuracy with that of transgingival probing when determining gingival thickness, in adult patients with good periodontal health. No language or time restrictions were applied in this systematic review. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: Six articles were included for qualitative synthesis, involving a pooled sample of 132 patients with a mean age of 29 years (18-51 years). Of these 6 studies, 5 were eligible for quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between CBCT and transgingival probing measures of gingival tissue (mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI-0.17-0.38). No significant level of heterogeneity was detected (Tau2-P = 0.0662; I2 = 0%; H2-P = 1.000; Q-P = 1.134). According to the GRADE criterion, confidence in the cumulative evidence was considered low. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT is an accurate method for determining gingival tissue thickness, comparable to the reference standard (transgingival probing). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CBCT could be considered for gingival thickness measurement when bone thickness is also needed, and thereby aid in the assessment of gingival biotype without the discomfort and anesthesia needed in transgingival probing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (International Prospective Register of Systematic Review) under registration number CRD42022326970. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022326970 .

Risk of oral cancer in patients with graft-vs-host disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review was undertaken to determine the risk of oral cancer in patients with chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGvHD). STUDY DESIGN: The search was conducted in 6 electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, and LIVIVO) and gray literature (Google Scholar, Open Gray, and ProQuest) for studies published up to November 2021. RESULTS: Of the 13 cohorts included in qualitative synthesis, 9 were eligible for the quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis showed that the presence of cGvHD increased the risk of developing oral cancer (risk ratio [RR] = 2.78; 95% CI, 1.27-6.08; I2 = 46%; P = .01). A subgroup meta-analysis revealed a higher risk of oral cancer in Asian samples exposed to cGvHD (RR = 2.50; 95% CI, 1.54-4.04; I2 = 0%; P = .0002), which was not seen in the pooled analysis of European samples (P = .24). The overall methodological quality of most studies included was "good." The cumulative evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was considered moderate and of very low confidence for Asian and European studies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cGvHD resulting from allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation run an increased risk of developing oral cancer. Hence, it is recommended that patients with cGvHD be monitored to allow for the early detection and treatment of secondary malignant disease.

Avaliação da Aplicação dos Filtros de Imagem na Detecção de Fraturas Radiculares / Evaluation of Enhacement Filters in the Detection of Vertical Root Fractures

Objetivo: Avaliar a acurácia, sensibilidade e especificidade de diferentes filtros do software Cliniview™ (versão 10.1) em radiografias periapicais digitais na detecção de fraturas radiculares verticais em dentes unirradiculares. Material e Métodos: Foram utilizados 31 dentes humanos recém-extraídos divididos em dois grupos: controle (CTL) e fraturado (FTR), constituídos por 15 e 16 dentes, respectivamente. Realizou-se o tratamento endodôntico dos dentes para posterior desobturação de 2/3 da raiz e confecção dos pinos metálicos. Após cimentação dos pinos, as raízes dos dentes grupo FTR foram fraturadas na máquina de ensaio (Instron). As radiografias periapicais digitais foram obtidas em todos os dentes com sistema digital Express™. As radiografias originais e com aplicação dos filtros (inversão na escala de cinza, hot, nitidez 1, vertical e vertical + horizontal) foram salvas e avaliadas por dois especialistas. Após as análises, foram calculados os valores de sensibilidade, especificidade, preditivo positivo, preditivo negativo e acurácia da radiografia periapical digital com e sem a aplicação dos filtros. Resultados: Considerando os dois examinadores, os maiores valores de acuraria, sensibilidade e especificidade para as imagens originais foram de 85,2%, 100% e 95,2% respectivamente. Para as radiografias com aplicação de filtro, os maiores valores de acurácia, sensibilidade e especificidade foram de 82,6%, 71,4% e 87,5%, respectivamente. Conclusão: O uso de filtros não aumentou os valores de acurácia, sensibilidade e especificidade das radiografias periapicais digitais para a detecção das fraturas radiculares verticais. De fato, pelo contrário, em alguns casos, o diagnóstico piorou.

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of different Cliniview™ (version 10.1) software filters in digital periapical radiographs for the detection of vertical root fractures in single-rooted teeth. Materials and Methods: Thirty-one human teeth freshly extracted were divided into two groups: control (CTL) and fractured (FTR), constituted by 15 and 16 teeth respectively. The endodontic treatment of the teeth was performed and followed by desobturation of ⅔ of the root canal and the metallic posts confection. After the cementation of the posts, the fractures were made using the universal test machine (Instron) only in the FTR group. The digital periapical radiographs were performed in all the teeth using the ExpressTM digital system. The original radiographs and the ones with applied filters (gray scale, hot, sharpness 1, vertical and vertical + horizontal) were saved and evaluated by two specialists. After the analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of the digital periapical radiographs with and without the application of filters were calculated. Results: Taking into consideration the two examiners, the highest accuracy, sensitivity and specificity values for the original images were 85,2%, 100% and 95,2% respectively. For the radiographs with applied filters, the highest accuracy, sensitivity and specificity values found were of 82,6%, 71,4% and 87,5%, respectively. Conclusion: The use of filters did not increase the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity values of the digital periapical radiographs for the detection of VRF. In fact, on the contrary, for some cases, the diagnosis became worse.