Advertisement

Diagnostic efficacy of 3 imaging modalities in the detection of fractured endodontic instruments: an in vitro study

Published:September 23, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2022.09.012

      Objectives

      To compare the diagnostic efficacy of periapical radiography (PAR) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) without and with a metal artifact reduction algorithm (MARA) in the detection of fractured endodontic instruments in unfilled and filled root canals that were straight and curved.

      Study Design

      In total, 144 root canals from 48 mandibular molars were divided into 4 groups: the control group with empty canals, the fracture group with a fractured instrument, the fill group with root canal filling, and the fracture/fill group with a fractured instrument and root canal filling. The teeth were examined with PAR using a complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensor and CBCT without and with MARA to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the 3 techniques in the detection of fractured instruments. Three examiners evaluated the radiographs.

      Results

      Overall, PAR exhibited significantly better diagnostic outcomes than CBCT without MARA. PAR yielded significantly better results than both CBCT protocols in the presence of root filling and in straight canals. In the absence of filling and in curved canals, there were no statistically significant differences among the 3 techniques.

      Conclusions

      PAR was the imaging technique that best detected fractured instruments in filled and unfilled straight root canals.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      References

        • Brito ACR
        • Verner FS
        • Junqueira RB
        • et al.
        Detection of fractured endodontic instruments in root canals: comparison between different digital radiography systems and cone-beam computed tomography.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 544-549
        • McGuigan MB
        • Louca C
        • Duncan HF.
        The impact of fractured endodontic instruments on treatment outcome.
        Br Dent J. 2013; 214: 285-289
        • Rosen E
        • Azizi H
        • Friedlander C
        • Taschieri S
        • Tsesis I.
        Radiographic identification of separated instruments retained in the apical third of root canal–filled teeth.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 1549-1552
        • Rosen E
        • Venezia NB
        • Azizi H
        • et al.
        A comparison of cone-beam computed tomography with periapical radiography in the detection of separated instruments retained in the apical third of root canal-filled teeth.
        J Endod. 2016; 42: 1035-1039
        • Borisova-Papancheva TI
        • Stankova S
        • Georgieva S.
        Conservative management of intracanal separated endodontic instruments-treatment decisions and related factors.
        SSMD. 2017; 3: 23-31
        • Costa ED
        • Brasil DM
        • Gaêta-Araujo H
        • Oliveira-Santos C
        • Freitas DQ.
        Do image enhancement filters in complementary metal oxide semiconductor and photostimulable phosphor imaging systems improve the detection of fractured endodontic instruments in periapical radiography?.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2021; 131: 247-255
        • Patel S
        • Dawood A
        • Ford TP
        • Whaites E.
        The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems.
        Int Endod J. 2007; 40: 818-830
        • Venskutonis T
        • Plotino G
        • Juodzbalys G
        • Mickeviciene L.
        The importance of cone-beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems: a review of the literature.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 1895-1901
        • Tsurumachi T
        • Honda K.
        A new cone beam computerized tomography system for use in endodontic surgery.
        Int Endod J. 2007; 40: 224-232
        • Rosen E
        • Taschieri S
        • Del Fabbro M
        • Beitlitum I
        • Tsesis I.
        The diagnostic efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography in endodontics: a systematic review and analysis by a hierarchical model of efficacy.
        J Endod. 2015; 41: 1008-1014
        • Fayad MI
        • Nair M
        • Levin MD
        • et al.
        AAE and AAOMR joint position statement: use of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics 2015 update.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2015; 120: 508-512
        • Costa E
        • Brasil D
        • Queiroz P
        • Verner F
        • Junqueira R
        • Freitas D.
        Use of the metal artefact reduction tool in the identification of fractured endodontic instruments in cone-beam computed tomography.
        Int Endod J. 2020; 53: 506-512
        • de Faria Vasconcelos K
        • Codari M
        • Queiroz PM
        • et al.
        The performance of metal artifact reduction algorithms in cone beam computed tomography images considering the effects of materials, metal positions, and fields of view.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2019; 127: 71-76
        • Queiroz PM
        • Santaella GM
        • da Paz TD
        • Freitas DQ.
        Evaluation of a metal artefact reduction tool on different positions of a metal object in the FOV.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017; 4620160366
        • Kajan ZD
        • Taramsari M
        • Fard NK
        • Khaksari F
        • Hamidi FM.
        The efficacy of metal artifact reduction mode in cone-beam computed tomography images on diagnostic accuracy of root fractures in teeth with intracanal posts.
        Iran Endod J. 2018; 13: 47
        • Faul F
        • Erdfelder E
        • Lang AG
        • G*Power Buchner A.
        3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.
        Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39: 175-191
        • Petrie A
        • Sabin C.
        Medical Statistics at a Glance.
        3rd ed. Blackwell, Oxford2009
        • Schneider SW.
        A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1971; 32: 271-275
        • Jafari M
        • Ansari-Pour N.
        Why, when and how to adjust your P values?.
        Cell Journal. 2019; 20: 604
        • DeLong ER
        • DeLong DM
        • Clarke-Pearson DL.
        Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach.
        J Biometrics. 1988; : 837-845
        • Hanley JA
        • McNeil BJ.
        The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
        J Radiol. 1982; 143: 29-36
        • Zweig MH
        • Campbell G.
        Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine.
        Clin Chem. 1993; 39: 561-577
        • Hosmer DW
        • Jr Lemeshow S
        • Sturdivant RX
        Applied Logistic Regression.
        John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ2013
        • Power M
        • Fell G
        • Wright M.
        Principles for high-quality, high-value testing.
        Evid Based Med. 2013; 18: 5-10
        • Koo TK
        • Li MY.
        A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research.
        J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15: 155-163
        • Pauwels R
        • Jacobs R
        • Bogaerts R
        • Bosmans H
        • Panmekiate S.
        Reduction of scatter-induced image noise in cone beam computed tomography: effect of field of view size and position.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2016; 121: 188-195
        • Cebe F
        • Aktan AM
        • Ozsevik AS
        • Ciftci ME
        • Surmelioglu HD.
        The effects of different restorative materials on the detection of approximal caries in cone-beam computed tomography scans with and without metal artifact reduction mode.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2017; 123: 392-400
        • Gaêta-Araujo H
        • Nascimento EHL
        • Fontenele RC
        • Mancini AXM
        • Freitas DQ
        • Oliveira-Santos C.
        Magnitude of beam-hardening artifacts produced by gutta-percha and metal posts on cone-beam computed tomography with varying tube current.
        Imaging Sci Dent. 2020; 50: 1-7
        • Freitas DQ
        • Fontenele RC
        • Nascimento EHL
        • Vasconcelos TV
        • Noujeim M.
        Influence of acquisition parameters on the magnitude of cone beam computed tomography artifacts.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018; 4720180151
        • Iqbal MK
        • Kohli MR
        • Kim JS.
        A retrospective clinical study of incidence of root canal instrument separation in an endodontics graduate program: a PennEndo database study.
        J Endod. 2006; 32: 1048-1052
        • Koç C
        • Sönmez G
        • Yılmaz F
        • Karahan S
        • Kamburoğlu K.
        Comparison of the accuracy of periapical radiography with CBCT taken at 3 different voxel sizes in detecting simulated endodontic complications: an ex vivo study.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018; 4720170399
        • Koç C
        • Kamburoğlu K
        • Sönmez G
        • Yılmaz F
        • Gülen O
        • Karahan S.
        Ability to detect endodontic complications using three different cone beam computed tomography units with and without artefact reduction modes: an ex vivo study.
        Int Endod J. 2019; 52: 725-736
        • Ayatollahi F
        • Tabrizizadeh M
        • Razavi H
        • Mowji M.
        Diagnostic value of cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography in detection of separated instruments.
        Iran Endod J. 2019; 14: 14-17
        • Alemam S
        • Abuelsadat S
        • Saber S
        • Elsewify T.
        Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of three imaging modalities in detection of separated intracanal instruments.
        G Ital Endod. 2020; 34: 97-103
        • Baratto-Filho F
        • Vavassori de Freitas J
        • Fagundes Tomazinho FS
        • Leao Gabardo MC
        • Mazzi-Chaves JF
        • Damiao Sousa-Neto M
        Cone-beam computed tomography detection of separated endodontic instruments.
        J Endod. 2020; 46: 1776-1781
        • Abdinian M
        • Moshkforoush S
        • Hemati H
        • Soltani P
        • Moshkforoushan M
        • Spagnuolo G.
        Comparison of cone beam computed tomography and digital radiography in detecting separated endodontic files and strip perforation.
        J Appl Sci. 2020; 10: 8726
        • D'Addazio P
        • Campos C
        • Özcan M
        • Teixeira H
        • Passoni R
        • Carvalho A.
        A comparative study between cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiographs in the diagnosis of simulated endodontic complications.
        Int Endod J. 2011; 44: 218-224
        • Queiroz PM
        • Oliveira ML
        • Groppo FC
        • Haiter-Neto F
        • Freitas DQ.
        Evaluation of metal artefact reduction in cone-beam computed tomography images of different dental materials.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 22: 419-423
        • Anuradha B
        • Subbiya A
        • Malarvizhi D
        • Shuruthi J.
        Etiology and management of separation of instruments in endodontics—an overview.
        Eur J Mol Clin Med. 2020; 7: 1229-1234
        • Krajczár K
        • Marada G
        • Gyulai G
        • Tóth V.
        Comparison of radiographic and electronical working length determination on palatal and mesio-buccal root canals of extracted upper molars.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 106: e90-e93
        • Tamse A
        • Kaffe I
        • Fishel D.
        Zygomatic arch interference with correct radiographic diagnosis in maxillary molar endodontics.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1980; 50: 563-565