Advertisement

Caries Detection with Dental Cone Beam Computed Tomography

  • Jeffery B. PriceEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Diagnosis of dental caries is not the primary indication of Dental Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). However, when dental CBCT is available the dental caries may by an incidental finding. This chapter discusses the principles of CBCT and its use for detection of dental caries. Studies indicate that for interproximal caries CBCT has similar reliability as conventional intraoral bitewing radiographs; however, the increased enamel thickness encountered on occlusal surfaces may interfere with the reliability of dental CBCT during the diagnosis of occlusal caries. Its’ use for diagnosis of interproximal recurrent caries does not appear to be as predictable or as reliable as for the diagnosis of primary interproximal caries, although when available and used as an adjunct, dental CBCT can provide helpful diagnostic advice. It is expected that improvements i in the area of x-ray beam filters, dual energy sources and x-ray scatter reduction there will be greater accuracy for detection of caries.

Keywords

Caries Detection Cone beam computed tomography CBCT X-rays 

References

  1. 1.
    Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998;8(9):1558–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28(4):245–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sousa Melo SL, Belem MDF, Prieto LT, Tabchoury CPM, Haiter-Neto F. Comparison of cone beam computed tomography and digital intraoral radiography performance in the detection of artificially induced recurrent caries-like lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017;124(3):306–14. (2212-4411 (Electronic)).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kalender WA. Computed tomography fundamentals, system technology, image quality, applications. Erlangen: Publicis Publishing; 2011. 372 p.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buzug T. Computed tomography from photon statistics to modern cone-beam CT. Heidelberg: Springer; 2008. 521 p.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt J, Edwin M, Boone JM. The essential physics of medical imaging [kindle edition]. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, a Wolters Kluwer business; 2012.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miles DA. Atlas of cone beam imaging for dental applications. 2nd ed. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing; 2012.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sarment DP. Cone beam computed tomography: oral and maxillofacial diagnosis and applications. Ames: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. 296 p.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52(4):24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1979 was awarded jointly to Allan M. McCormack and Godfrey N. Hounsfield for the development of computer assisted tomography; [Website]. NobelPrize.org: Nobel Foundation; 1979 [cited 2017]. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1979/.
  11. 11.
    Nemtoi A, Czink C, Haba D, Gahleitner A. Cone beam CT: a current overview of devices. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(8):20120443. (0250–832X (Print)).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buzug T. Chapter 8.6 Approximate 3D reconstructions in cone-beam geometry. In: Computed tomography: from photon statistics to modern cone-beam CT. Berlin: Springer; 2008. p. 366–401.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pauwels R, Nackaerts O, Bellaiche N, Stamatakis H, Tsiklakis K, Walker A, et al. Variability of dental cone beam CT grey values for density estimations. Br J Radiol. 2013;86(1021):20120135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsuchida R, Araki K, Okano T. Evaluation of a limited cone-beam volumetric imaging system: comparison with film radiography in detecting incipient proximal caries. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;104(3):412–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kalathingal SM, Mol A, Tyndall DA, Caplan DJ. In vitro assessment of cone beam local computed tomography for proximal caries detection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;104(5):699–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haiter-Neto F, Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography scans compared with intraoral image modalities for detection of caries lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37(1):18–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Akdeniz BG, Grondahl HG, Magnusson B. Accuracy of proximal caries depth measurements: comparison between limited cone beam computed tomography, storage phosphor and film radiography. Caries Res. 2006;40(3):202–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Young SM, Lee JT, Hodges RJ, Chang TL, Elashoff DA, White SC. A comparative study of high-resolution cone beam computed tomography and charge-coupled device sensors for detecting caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38(7):445–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang ZL, Qu XM, Li G, Zhang ZY, Ma XC. The detection accuracies for proximal caries by cone-beam computerized tomography, film, and phosphor plates. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111(1):103–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kayipmaz S, Sezgin OS, Saricaoglu ST, Can G. An in vitro comparison of diagnostic abilities of conventional radiography, storage phosphor, and cone beam computed tomography to determine occlusal and approximal caries. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80(2):478–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Senel B, Kamburoglu K, Ucok O, Yuksel SP, Ozen T, Avsever H. Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities in detection of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39(8):501–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wenzel A, Hirsch E, Christensen J, Matzen LH, Scaf G, Frydenberg M. Detection of cavitated approximal surfaces using cone beam CT and intraoral receptors. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(1):39458105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Yuksel SP, Cebeci AR, Paksoy CS. Occlusal caries detection by using a cone-beam CT with different voxel resolutions and a digital intraoral sensor. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;109(5):e63–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Charuakkra A, Prapayasatok S, Janhom A, Pongsiriwet S, Verochana K, Mahasantipiya P. Diagnostic performance of cone-beam computed tomography on detection of mechanically-created artificial secondary caries. Imaging Sci Dent. 2011;41(4):143–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Murat S, Kamburoglu K, Isayev A, Kursun S, Yuksel S. Visibility of artificial buccal recurrent caries under restorations using different radiographic techniques. Oper Dent. 2013;38(2):197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kulczyk T, Dyszkiewicz Konwinska M, Owecka M, Krzyzostaniak J, Surdacka A. The influence of amalgam fillings on the detection of approximal caries by cone beam CT: in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43(7):20130342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bilgin MS, Aglarci OS, Erdem A. Posttreatment diagnosis of caries under fixed restorations: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1364–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aglarci OS, Bilgin MS, Erdem A, Ertas ET. Is it possible to diagnose caries under fixed partial dentures with cone beam computed tomography? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015;119(5):579–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shahidi S, Zadeh NK, Sharafeddin F, Shahab S, Bahrampour E, Hamedani S. An in vitro comparison of diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography and phosphor storage plate to detect simulated occlusal secondary caries under amalgam restoration. Dent Res J. 2015;12(2):161–6.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vedpathak PR, Gondivkar SM, Bhoosreddy AR, Shah KR, Verma GR, Mehrotra GP, et al. Cone beam computed tomography- an effective tool in detecting caries under fixed dental prostheses. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(8):Zc10–3.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kasraei S, Shokri A, Poorolajal J, Khajeh S, Rahmani H. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and intraoral radiography in detection of recurrent caries under composite restorations. Braz Dent J. 2017;28(1):85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Maryland School of DentistryBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations