Radiographic detection of occlusal caries in noncavitated teeth. A comparison of conventional film radiographs, digitized film radiographs, and RadioVisioGraphy.

Department of Radiology, Royal Dental College, Aarhus, Denmark.
Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology 12/1991; 72(5):621-6. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(91)90504-6
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of conventional film radiographs, digitized radiographs, and RadioVisioGraphy (RVG) for the detection of dentinal caries in occlusal surfaces of noncavitated extracted teeth. Eighty-one fully erupted extracted third molars were assessed by four observers using five radiographic methods: conventional film radiographs, digitized radiographs with contrast enhancement and with a filtering procedure, and RVG with contrast enhancement and with x function. Scoring criteria were dichotomous. Histologic sections (500 to 600 microns thick) served as the validation criterion. The two digital methods with contrast enhancement tended to perform more accurately than, although not significantly different from, the other three methods (p greater than 0.05). Average likelihood ratios (true positive/false positive) were 4.3 (conventional film radiographs), 4.4 (RVG with contrast enhancement), 3.6 (RVG with x function), 4.9 (digitized radiographs with contrast enhancement), and 3.7 (digitized radiographs with filtering procedure). Observers 1 and 2 (oral radiologists) performed better than observers 3 and 4 with all five methods (p less than 0.005).

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diminished alveolar bone support is the principal cause of tooth loss. This bone loss is most commonly attributed to periodontal disease. The causes of periodontal disease are not fully understood although bacteria in dental plaque are known to be major contributors. Moreover, it is thought that the incidence and prevalence of alveolar bone loss vary among human populations, hence identification of high-risk groups is essential to epidemiological studies aimed at establishing hypotheses about the etiology of alveolar bone loss. Data drawn from population surveys can then be used to test these hypotheses. Both epidemiological studies and laboratory and clinical testing have been hampered because of the lack of accurate methods for alveolar bone quantification. Recently, several non-invasive, image-based techniques, with accuracy sufficient for testing hypotheses concerning alveolar bone, have become available. The most commonly used of these methods are x-rays and dental radiographic films. We review the current methods for quantitative dental radiography, concentrating on digital techniques used in alveolar bone assessment. Although there is considerable potential to improve the imaging and quantifying of alveolar bone, current digital radiographic methods are practical for use by physical anthropologists and can provide information on bone mass variations among populations. Such information can be used to suggest and evaluate potential etiologic agents of alveolar bone loss. Moreover, these methods can be adapted to the quantitative measurement of image features (other than alveolar bone) that are of interest in anthropologic studies. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 06/2005; 37(S19):155 - 176. DOI:10.1002/ajpa.1330370607 · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to evaluate types and frequencies of radiographic screening examinations, and radiographic equipment and film used in general dental practice in Denmark. A questionnaire was mailed to 400 randomly selected dental practitioners. A total of 258 questionnaires were returned, out of which 249 were analyzed. Two-thirds of the respondents performed radiographic screening examinations, of which bitewing-screening was the one most frequently used for first-visit and regular patients. The more recent their graduation year, the more apt were dentists to perform radiographic screening examinations. More than 40% of the dentists had radiographic units operating at a voltage capacity of 60–70 kV, and more than 50% had facilities for automatic or semiautomatic processing. Only one-quarter of the respondents used the Kodak Ektaspeed film (E-speed film). The results show that radiographic procedures and film used in general dental practice are not always in accordance with guidelines and recommendations.
    European Journal Of Oral Sciences 01/1993; 101(1):52 - 56. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0722.1993.tb01647.x · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the caries diagnostic outcome of four methods frequently used as validation for dental caries. The diagnostic outcome of clinical examination (CL), radiography (RA), and histology after serial tooth sectioning (HI-serial) on 373 approximal and 158 occlusal surfaces was compared, and furthermore histology after hemi- (HI-hemi) and serial sectioning on another 113 approximal and 53 occlusal surfaces was compared. Two thresholds for each method (CL: (1) sound vs. all caries scores, and (2) non-cavitated vs. cavitated lesions; RA and HI: (1) sound vs. all caries scores, and (2) no dentine vs. dentine lesions) were evaluated. In general, large differences in diagnostic outcomes were observed with the various methods. At threshold 1, CL resulted in significantly more lesions than both RA and HI-serial on approximal surfaces, and than RA on occlusal surfaces. At threshold 2, no significant differences between CL, RA and HI-serial were found on approximal surfaces, but on occlusal surfaces significantly more lesions were diagnosed with RA and HI-serial than with CL. Significantly more occlusal lesions were found by HI-serial than by RA at both thresholds 1 and 2. On approximal surfaces, a similar result was found only at threshold 1. On approximal surfaces, significantly more lesions were diagnosed with HI-serial than with HI-hemi at both thresholds 1 and 2. On occlusal surfaces the same was found only at threshold 1. The intra-observer reproducibility was higher using HI-serial than using RA and CL.
    Caries Research 01/2003; 37(2):115-124. DOI:10.1159/000069016 · 2.50 Impact Factor