Are you Byron W Benson?

Claim your profile

Publications (5)4.16 Total impact

  • Byron W Benson · Diane J Flint · Hui Liang · Michael J Opatowsky
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Advances in dental and maxillofacial imaging are delineated along with the advantages and disadvantages of each imaging modality. The imaging modalities that are included are intraoral radiography, panoramic radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, multidetector computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, nuclear medicine, and ultrasound.
    No preview · Article · Dec 2014 · Head and Neck Pathology
  • YH Jung · H Liang · B W Benson · D J Flint · B H Cho
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to correlate the position of impacted maxillary canines on panoramic radiography with cone beam CT (CBCT) and analyse the labiopalatal position of canines and root resorption of permanent incisors in CBCT according to the mesiodistal position of canines on panoramic radiographs. This study was a retrospective radiographic review of 63 patients with 73 impacted maxillary canines. The mesiodistal position of the canine cusp tip was classified by sector location and analysed on 73 impacted canines from 63 panoramic radiographs. The labiopalatal position of the impacted canines and root resorption of permanent incisors were evaluated with CBCT. The sector location on panoramic radiographs was compared with the labiopalatal position of impacted maxillary canines on CBCT. The statistical correlation between panoramic and CBCT findings was examined using the χ(2) test and the Fisher's exact test. Labially impacted canines in CBCT were more frequent in Panoramic Sectors 1, 2 and 3, mid-alveolus impacted canines were more frequent in Sector 4 and palatally impacted canines were more frequent in Sector 5. There was a statistically significant association between the panoramic sectors of the impacted canines and the labiopalatal position of the canines (p < 0.001). Root resorption of permanent incisors showed a significant difference according to sector location (p < 0.001) and was observed in Sectors 3, 4 and 5. This study suggests that the labiopalatal position of impacted canines and resorption of permanent incisors might be predicted using sector location on panoramic radiography.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2011 · Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
  • Byron W Benson · Hui Liang · Diane J Flint
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Panoramic imaging continues to be a clinically popular tool in the diagnosis and assessment of dental patients. Digital technology improves the efficiency of the imaging system, may reduce overall costs and radiation risk, and aids in optimal interpretation of the image.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2011 · Compendium of continuing education in dentistry (Jamesburg, N.J.: 1995)
  • Source
    H Liang · D J Flint · B W Benson
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2011 · Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In this study, we evaluated the accuracy and reliability of tooth-length and root-length measurements derived from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) volumetric data. CBCT scans were made of 7 fresh porcine heads. The scans were made with an i-CAT machine (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, Pa) at 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 mm voxel sizes. Two film-acquired periapical radiographs were also taken of selected incisors and premolars, 52 of which (28 premolars, 24 incisors) were included in this study. By using Dolphin imaging software (version 10.5, Dolphin Imaging Systems, Chatsworth, Calif), the CBCT scans were oriented twice for each tooth (ie, 2 trials) using the mesial, distal, labial, and lingual cementoenamel junctions as reference points. Root and tooth lengths were derived from these points and compared with actual measurements of the teeth made with digital calipers after all surrounding bone had been carefully removed. CBCT tooth-length and root-length measurements were not significantly different from the actual lengths; the mean differences were less than 0.3 mm. The periapical measurements significantly (P = 0.001) underestimated root lengths (mean difference, 2.58 mm) and overestimated tooth lengths (mean difference, 2.58 mm; P = 0.056). Mean differences between the 3 CBCT voxel sizes were all less than 0.25 mm. Within-trial method errors were almost 2 times greater for the periapical radiographs than for the CBCT scans. Between-trial method errors were greatest for the 0.4-mm CBCT scans, which were within 0.1 mm of the periapical radiograph method errors. The intraclass correlations for the periapical and CBCT measurements were all above 0.995. CBCT scans are at least as accurate and reliable as periapical radiographs for tooth-length and root-length determinations.
    No preview · Article · Apr 2010 · American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics: official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics