ArticleClinical oral investigations2019
Detection and measurements of apical lesions in the upper jaw by cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography as a function of cortical bone thickness.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn the current literature, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) seems to be more accurate in detecting apical lesions (AL) than two-dimensional radiographs. Cortical bone thickness might have an influence on AL visibility. Therefore, the purpose of the study was to directly compare the diagnostic accuracy of panoramic radiography (PANO) and CBCT in detecting AL in the upper jaw and determine the influence of cortical bone thickness on AL visibility. MATERIALS AND
methodsAnonymised digital images of 351 patients who received a CBCT image and a panoramic radiograph within 90 days were examined for AL in the upper jaw. The analysis was conducted by a trained examiner and reviewed by an expert in dental radiology. Further, the dimensions of AL and cortical bone thickness in the region affected by AL were measured to determine their influence on visibility. Statistical analysis was carried out by means of statistical software (IBM SPSS 25; Armonk, NY, USA).
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 58.9 years with an almost equal gender distribution. A total of 2223 teeth in the upper jaw were included in the final analysis. CBCT detected AL on 144 teeth (6.5%), of which only 23 were also visible on a PANO. The difference between both methods was significant (p < 0.001). The dimensions of AL measured within a PANO were approximately twice as high as those measured by CBCT. However, the difference was not significant (p ≥ 0.005). Cortical bone thickness had no influence on AL visibility. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Panoramic radiographs are unsuitable for a reliable diagnosis of AL in the upper jaw, while CBCT leads to a better visualisation of AL. Bone thickness has no significant influence on AL visibility with either imaging method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.