Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Importance of Radiographic Interpretation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Common Complications in Endodontics

  • 1562 Accesses

Abstract

Radiographic examination is an indispensable adjunct in endodontics, especially for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up after endodontic therapy. Currently, periapical radiography is the first choice of imaging method in endodontics clinical practice and a valuable tool to diagnose and to follow up patients (Fig. 2.1). Furthermore, the practice of radiography is traditionally used in various stages of root canal therapy, such as for determination of work length. Digital intraoral radiography systems are being used increasingly for these purposes, with having similar accuracy as film radiography [1–3]. Currently, a variety of digital intraoral systems are commercially available.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Mentes A, Gencoglu N. Canal length evaluation of curved canals by direct digital or conventional radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002;93:88–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Raghav N, Reddy SS, Giridhar AG, Murthy S, Yashodha Devi BK, Santana N, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of conventional radiography, digital radiography, and ultrasound in diagnosing periapical lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:379–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Konishi M, Lindh C, Nilsson M, Tanimoto K, Rohlin M. Important technical parameters are not presented in reports of intraoral digital radiography in endodontic treatment: recommendations for future studies. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;114(2):251–8.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2012.02.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Heo MS, Choi DH, Benavides E, Huh KH, Yi WJ, Lee SS, Choi SC. Effect of bit depth and kVp of digital radiography for detection of subtle differences. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108(2):278–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.12.053. Epub 2009 Mar 9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Farman AG, Farman TT. A comparison of 18 different x-ray detectors currently used in dentistry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005;99:485–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. de Oliveira ML, Pinto GC, Ambrosano GM, Tosoni GM. Effect of combined digital imaging parameters on endodontic file measurements. J Endod. 2012;38(10):1404–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.06.006. Epub 2012 Jul 10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nejaim Y, Gomes AF, Silva EJ, Groppo FC, Haiter NF. The influence of number of line pairs in digital intra-oral radiography on the detection accuracy of horizontal root fractures. Dent Traumatol. 2016;32:180–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heo MS, Han DH, An BM, Huh KH, Yi WJ, Lee SS, et al. Effect of ambient light and bit depth of digital radiograph on observer performance in determination of endodontic file positioning. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105:239–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Tsuchida R, Araki K, Endo A, Funahashi I, Okano T. Physical properties and ease of operation of a wireless intraoral x-ray sensor. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005;100(5):603–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. van der Stelt PF. Filmless imaging: the uses of digital radiography in dental practice. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136(10):1379–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Berkhout WE, Beuger DA, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF. The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. de Souza TM, de Castro RD, de Vasconcelos LC, Pontual AD, de Moraes Ramos Perez FM, Pontual ML. Microbial contamination in intraoral phosphor storage plates: the dilemma. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(1):301–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1790-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Durack C, Patel S. Cone beam computed tomography in Endodontics. Braz Dent J. 2012;23(3):179–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Scarfe WC, Levin MD, Gane D, Farman AG. Use of cone beam computed tomography in Endodontics. Int J Dent. 2009;2009:634567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. American Association of Endodontists; American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Use of cone-beam computed tomography in endodontics joint position statement of the American Association of Endodontists and the American Academy of oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Feb;111(2):234–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. SEDENTEXCT guidelines. Safety and efficacy of a new and emerging dental x-ray modality: radiation protection no. 172-cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology (evidence-based guidelines). http://www.sedentexct.eu/files/radiation_protection_172.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  17. 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(12):1895–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ee J, Fayad MI, Johnson BR. Comparison of endodontic diagnosis and treatment planning decisions using cone-beam volumetric tomography versus periapical radiography. J Endod. 2014;40(7):910–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sakhadari S, Talaeipour AR, Talaeipour M, Pazhutan M, Tehrani SH, Kharazifard MJ. Diagnostic accuracy of CBCT with different voxel sizes and intraoral digital radiography for detection of periapical bone lesions: an ex-vico study. J Dent (Tehran). 2016;13(2):77–84.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Balasundaram A, Shah P, Hoen MM, Wheater MA, Bringas JS, Gartner A, Geist JR. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in predicting treatment decision for periapical lesions: a clinical study. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:920815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nikneshan S, Valizadeh S, Javanmard A, Alibakhshi L. Effect of voxel size on detection of external root resorption defects using cone beam computed tomography. Iran J Radiol. 2016;13(3):e34985.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Yi J, Sun Y, Li Y, Li C, Li X, Zhao Z. Cone-beam computed tomography versus periapical radiograph for diagnosis external root resorption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(2):328–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pinto M, Rabelo KA, Sousa Melo SL, Campos P, Oliveira L, Bento PM, Melo DP. Influence of exposure parameters on the detection of simulated root fractures in the presence of various intracanal materials. Int Endod J. 2017;50(6):586–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Melo SL, Bortoluzzi EA, Abreu M Jr, Corrêa LR, Corrêa M. Diagnostic ability of a cone- beam computed tomography scan to assess longitudinal root fractures in prosthetically treated teeth. J Endod. 2010;36:1879–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Neves FS, Freitas DQ, Campos PSF, Ekestubbe A, Lofthag-Hansen S. Evaluation of cone -beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of vertical root fractures: the influence of imaging modes and root canal materials. J Endod. 2014;10:1530–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Vasconcelos KF, Nicolielo LF, Nascimento MC, Haiter-Neto F, Bóscolo FN, Van Dessel J, EzEldeen M, Lambrichts I, Jacobs R. Artefact expression associated with several cone-beam computed tomographic machines when imaging root filled teeth. Int Endod J. 2015;48(10):994–1000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D, Bruellmann DD, Dranischnikow E, Schwanecke U, et al. Artefacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:265–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schulze RK, Berndt D, d'Hoedt B. On cone-beam computed tomography artifacts induced by titanium implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21:100–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Esmaeili F, Johari M, Haddadi P, Vatankhah M. Beam hardening artifacts: comparison between two cone beam computed tomography scanners. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2012;6(2):49–53.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Bechara B, Alex McMahan C, Moore W, Noujeim M, Teixeira F, Geha H. Cone beam CT scans with and without artefact reduction in root fracture detection of endodontically treated teeth. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(5):20120245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anatomy, Centre for Biological Sciences, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, PE, Brazil

    Carla Cabral dos Santos Accioly Lins

  2. Oral Radiology Area, Department of Clinical and Preventive Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil

    Flavia Maria de Moraes Ramos Perez, Andrea Dos Anjos Pontual de Andrade Lima & Maria Luiza dos Anjos Pontual

Authors
  1. Carla Cabral dos Santos Accioly Lins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Flavia Maria de Moraes Ramos Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrea Dos Anjos Pontual de Andrade Lima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Luiza dos Anjos Pontual
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carla Cabral dos Santos Accioly Lins .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Endodontics, Apex Medical Clinics, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Priyanka Jain

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

dos Santos Accioly Lins, C.C., de Moraes Ramos Perez, F.M., de Andrade Lima, A.D.A.P., dos Anjos Pontual, M.L. (2018). Importance of Radiographic Interpretation. In: Jain, P. (eds) Common Complications in Endodontics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60997-3_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60997-3_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60996-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60997-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation