Cone beam computed tomography for diagnosis of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: evaluation of quantitative and qualitative image parameters
To assess the diagnostic performance of quantitative and qualitative image parameters in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for diagnosis of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ).
Materials and methods
A BRONJ (22 patients, mean age 70.0 years) group was age and gender matched to a healthy control group (22 patients, mean age 68.0 years). On CBCT images two independent readers performed quantitative bone density value (BDV) measurements with region and volume-of-interest (ROI and VOI) based approaches and qualitative scoring of BRONJ-associated necrosis, sclerosis and periosteal thickening (1 = not present to 5 = definitely present). Intraoperative and clinical findings served as standard of reference. Interreader agreements and diagnostic performance were assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), kappa-statistics and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
Twenty-three regions in 22 patients were affected by BRONJ. ICC values for mean BDV VOI and mean BDV ROI were 0.864 and 0.968, respectively (p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) for mean BDV VOI and mean BDV ROI was 0.58/0.83 with a sensitivity of 57/83 % and specificity of 61/77 % for diagnosis of BRONJ, respectively. Kappa values for presence of necrosis, sclerosis and periosteal thickening were 0.575, 0.617 and 0.885, respectively. AUC values for qualitative parameters ranged between 0.90–0.96 with sensitivity of 96 % and specificities between 79–96 % at respective cutoff scores.
BRONJ can be effectively diagnosed with CBCT. Qualitative image parameters yield a higher diagnostic performance than quantitative parameters, and ROI-based attenuation measurements were more accurate than VOI-based measurements.
KeywordsCone beam CT Bisphosphonate Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) Diagnostic performance
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 10.Chamizo Carmona E, Gallego Flores A, Loza Santamaria E, Herrero Olea A, Rosario Lozano MP. Systematic literature review of biphosphonates and osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with osteoporosis. Reumatol Clin. 2012.Google Scholar
- 13.Stockmann P, Hinkmann FM, Lell MM, et al. Panoramic radiograph, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Which imaging technique should be preferred in bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw? a prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14(3):311–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Guggenberger R, Fischer DR, Metzler P, Andreisek G, Nanz D, Jacobsen C, et al. Bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis of the jaw: comparison of disease extent on contrast-enhanced MR imaging, [18 F] Fluoride PET/CT, and conebeam CT imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012.Google Scholar