Author:

Keywords:

Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine, cone beam CT, digital radiography, endodontic, root canal, void detection, PERIAPICAL RADIOGRAPHY, LATERAL CONDENSATION, FILM RADIOGRAPHY, CANAL FILLINGS, GUTTA-PERCHA, EX-VIVO, LESIONS, TOMOGRAPHY, ACCURACY, SENSORS, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Cuspid, Dental Pulp Cavity, Humans, Linear Models, Observer Variation, Porosity, Radiography, Dental, Radiography, Dental, Digital, Root Canal Filling Materials, Root Canal Obturation, Tooth Apex, Tooth Cervix, 1105 Dentistry, Dentistry, 3203 Dentistry

Abstract:

AIM: To compare void detection in root fillings using different radiographic imaging techniques: intraoral analogue, intraoral digital and cone beam CT (CBCT) images and to assess factors influencing small void detection. METHODOLOGY: Two straight root canals in canine teeth were prepared. Calibrated steel wires of five different diameters (200, 300, 350, 500, 800 microm) were inserted respectively in the canal after the injection of a sealer. To simulate filling voids of known dimensions, the wires were removed after the sealer had set. Each sample was imaged, using a Minray X-ray tube (Soredex, Helsinki, Finland) at optimal clinical settings combined with Vistascan PSP (Dürr Dental, Bietigheim-Bissingen, Germany), Digora Optime PSP (Soredex), Sigma CCD (Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland) and E-speed films (Agfa-Gevaert, Mortsel, Belgium). The teeth were also imaged using CBCT (3D Accuitomo, Morita, Japan). A generalized mixed model and ANOVA analysis were used on the acquired data (Tukey-Kramer correction). RESULTS: There was no evidence that the factor 'root level' affected void detection in root fillings. 'Void size' was a main determining factor as all voids larger than 300 microm were determined with all techniques. For the smaller voids, there were significant differences between the 5 imaging techniques at different void sizes and different root levels. CONCLUSIONS: Void size and imaging technique were main determining factors. Voids larger than 300 mum were determined with all imaging techniques. For small void detection, all digital intraoral techniques performed better than intraoral analogue and CBCT images.