ArticlePloS one2025
Determine the accuracy of CBCT reconstructed panoramic images in periodontal assessment.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPeriodontal probing and intraoral radiography are conventional methods for periodontal assessment. Evaluating periodontium using CBCT-reconstructed multiplanar or cross-sectional views is labor-intensive and time-consuming. The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of CBCT-simulated panoramic projections for periodontal assessment and determine whether a more efficient evaluation method can be developed.
methodsCBCTs taken at East Carolina University School of Dental Medicine from 2014-2023 were screened. The inclusion criteria were: (1) diagnostic-quality CBCT scans covering maxilla and/or mandible; (2) full-mouth surveys (FMXs) taken within 6 months of the CBCT scans; and (3) clinical attachment loss (CAL) noted in periodontal charting. The cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to alveolar crest distance on mesial and distal surfaces of maxillary and mandibular central incisors, canines, first premolars, and first molars were measured on bitewings/periapical radiographs (BW/PA) and CBCT-simulated panoramic images. CALs were extracted from periodontal chartings. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD post hoc test, Pearson correlation, and Bland Altman analysis were used to analyze the data.
resultsCBCT, BW/PA, and CAL demonstrated strong correlations, with BW/PA and CBCT producing comparable results in periodontal assessments for most sites. For mandibular central incisors and canines, CBCT and PA showed significantly more bone loss compared to CAL values. For the mandibular molars, CBCT revealed significantly more bone loss compared to BW.
conclusionsCBCT-reconstructed panoramic imaging has proven to be a reliable tool for periodontal assessment. Some discrepancies among the evaluation methods are likely due to periodontal configurations or conditions, operator errors, and the projection geometry of intraoral radiographs.
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.