Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Low-dose cone-beam computed tomography in simulated condylar erosion detection: a diagnostic accuracy study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of the present study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of low-dose cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the detection of simulated mandibular condyle erosions.

Methods

102 simulated erosions were performed on the condyles of eight dry human mandibles. Each mandible was subjected to four CBCT scan protocols: high-definition (HD), normal definition (NORM), ultra-low-dose high-definition (ULD-HD), and ultra-low-dose normal definition (ULD-NORM). All scans were analyzed by two observers. The inter-observer and intra-observer agreement as well as the agreement with the gold standard were assessed. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, negative-predictive value and accuracy of erosion detection were calculated.

Results

A substantial to almost perfect agreement with the gold standard was found regarding the HD protocol and substantial agreement in NORM and ULD-HD protocols; however, moderate agreement was found regarding the ULD-NORM protocol. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy values were highest for the HD protocol followed by the NORM and ULD-HD which showed comparable results; while, the ULD-NORM protocol showed the least values.

Conclusions

The studied ULD-HD CBCT protocol can be recommended for the detection of mandibular condylar erosions due to the reduced radiation dose; however, ULD-NORM is not advocated for similar clinical use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Naser AZ, Shirani AM, Hekmatian E, Valiani A, Ardestani P, Vali A. Comparison of accuracy of uncorrected and corrected sagittal tomography in detection of mandibular condyle erosions. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2010;7(2):76–81.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Santos LAN, Campos PSF, Paula AMP, Martelli Júnior H, Melo Filho MR. Image of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in mandibular condyle–case report. Rev ABRO. 2005;6(1):29–34.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tanaka E, Detamore MS, Mercuri LG. Degenerative disorders of the temporomandibular joint: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. J Dent Res. 2008;87(4):296–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Robinson B, Kelma V, Marques LS, Pereira LJ. Imaging diagnosis of the temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol. 2009;25(2):86–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Marques AP, Perrella A, Arita ES, Pereira MF, Cavalcanti M. Assessment of simulated mandibular condyle bone lesions by cone beam computed tomography. Braz Oral Res. 2010;24(4):467–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hashimoto K, Arai Y, Iwai K, Araki M, Kawashima S, Terakado M. A comparison of a new limited cone beam computed tomography machine for dental use with a multidetector row helical CT machine. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003;95(3):371–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pauwels R. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial imaging: dose matters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2015;165(1–4):156–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bastos LC, Campos PS, Ramos-Perez FM, Pontual AD, Almeida SM. Evaluation of condyle defects using different reconstruction protocols of cone-beam computed tomography. Braz Oral Res (São Paulo). 2013;27(6):503–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel A, Tee BC, Fields H, Jones E, Chaudhry J, Sun Z. Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of simulated small osseous defects in the mandibular condyle. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145(2):143–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Salemi F, Shokri A, Mortazavi H, Baharvand M. Diagnosis of simulated condylar bone defects using panoramic radiography, spiral tomography and cone-beam computed tomography: a comparison study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015;7(1):e34–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hegde V, Naikmasur VG, Burde KN, Jayade GR. Validity of orthopantomograph, cone beam computed tomography and CT for assessment of simulated lesions over mandibular condyle. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017;3(3):142–8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Oenning AC, Pauwels R, Stratis A, De Faria Vasconcelos K, Tijskens E, De Grauwe A, et al. Halve the dose while maintaining image quality in paediatric cone beam CT. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):5521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, Hunter R, Benavide E, Samuelson DB, et al. Effective dose of dental CBCT-a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Roberts JA, Drage NA, Davies J, Thomas DW. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry. Br J Radiol. 2009;82(973):35–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(2):267–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Liljeholm R, Kadesjö N, Benchimol D, Hellén-Halme K, Shi X. Cone-beam tomography with ultralow dose protocols for pre-implant radiographic assessment: an in vitro study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017;10(3):351–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Beam CA. Strategies for improving power in diagnostic radiology research. Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159(3):631–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Salemi F, Shokri A, Maleki FH, Farhadian M, Dashti G, Ostovarrad F, et al. Effect of field of view on detection of condyle bone defects using cone-beam computed tomography. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(3):644–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Shetty US, Burde KN, Naikmasur VG, Sattur AP. Assessment of condylar changes in patients with temporomandibular joint pain using digital volumetric tomography. Radiol Res Pract. 2014;2014:106059.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Šimundić AM. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: basic definitions. EJIFCC. 2009;19(4):203–11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Bushberg JT. Science, Radiation Protection, and the NCRP: building on the past, looking to the future. In: NCRP: achievements of the past 50 years and addressing the needs of the future. Fiftieth annual meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP); 2014 March 11-March 14; Bethesda; United States.

  23. Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45(4):263–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pauwels R, Silkosessak O, Jacobs R, Bogaerts R, Bosmans H, Panmekiate S. A pragmatic approach to determine the optimal kVp in cone-beam CT: balancing contrast-to-noise ratio and radiation dose. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43(5):20140059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shahab S, Nikkerdar N, Goodarzi M, Golshah A, Shooshtari SS. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in detection of simulated mandibular condyle erosions. Dent Hypotheses. 2015;6(3):97–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Honda K, Larheim TA, Maruhashi K, Matsumoto K, Iwai K. Osseous abnormalities of the mandibular condyle: diagnostic reliability of cone beam computed tomography compared with helical computed tomography based on autopsy material. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35(3):152–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Zain Alabdeen EH, Alsadhan RI. A comparative study of accuracy of detection of surface osseous changes in the temporomandibular joint using multidetector CT and cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41(3):185–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zain Alabdeen EH. Accuracy of half-exposure time in cone-beam computed tomography imaging for the detection of surface osseous changes in the temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol. 2017;33(2):124–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Parikh R, Mathai A, Parikh S, Chandra Sekhar G, Thomas R. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008;56(1):45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health. 2017;5:307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Honey OB, Scarfe WC, Hilgers MJ. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint: comparisons with panoramic radiology and linear tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132(4):429–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Holroyd JR, Walker A. Recommendations for the design of X-ray facilities and the quality assurance of dental cone beam CT (computed tomography) systems. A report of the HPA working party on dental cone beam CT. 2010; Report No.: HPA-RPD-065. Chilton, UK: Health Protection Agency.

  34. European Commission. Radiation protection No. 172: Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Evidence-based guidelines. 2012; Luxembourg City, Luxembourg: European Commission, Directorate for Energy.

  35. Librizzi ZT, Tadinada AS, Valiyaparambil JV, Lurie AG, Mallya SM. Cone-beam computed tomography to detect erosions of the temporomandibular joint: effect of field of view and voxel size on diagnostic efficacy and effective dose. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140(1):e25–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yadav S, Palo L, Mahdian M, Upadhyay M, Tadinada A. Diagnostic accuracy of 2 cone-beam computed tomography protocols for detecting arthritic changes in temporomandibular joints. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(3):339–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tsiklakis K, Syriopoulos K, Stamatakis HC. Radiographic examination of the temporomandibular joint using cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33(3):196–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hussain AM, Packota G, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Role of different imaging modalities in assessment of temporomandibular joint erosions and osteophytes: a systematic review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37(2):63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Yasmeen Abulmaaty, MSc. of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, for her assistance in the sample preparation, randomization and blinding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, 11, El Saraya St., Almanyal, Cairo, 11553, Egypt

    Noha Saleh Abu-Taleb & Dina Mohamed ElBeshlawy

Authors
  1. Noha Saleh Abu-Taleb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dina Mohamed ElBeshlawy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noha Saleh Abu-Taleb.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author Noha Saleh Abu-Taleb and Author Dina Mohamed ElBeshlawy declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human rights statement

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abu-Taleb, N.S., ElBeshlawy, D.M. Low-dose cone-beam computed tomography in simulated condylar erosion detection: a diagnostic accuracy study. Oral Radiol 37, 427–435 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-020-00474-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-020-00474-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation