Diagnostics (Apr 2024)

Comparative Analysis of Examination Methods for Periapical Lesion Diagnostics: Assessing Cone-Beam Computer Tomography, Ultrasound, and Periapical Radiography

  • Aleksandra Karkle,
  • Anda Slaidina,
  • Maksims Zolovs,
  • Anete Vaskevica,
  • Dita Meistere,
  • Zanda Bokvalde,
  • Laura Neimane

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14070766
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 7
p. 766

Abstract

Read online

Introduction: Periapical lesions of teeth are typically evaluated using periapical X-rays (PA) or cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT); however, ultrasound imaging (US) can also be used to detect bone defects. A comparative analysis is necessary to establish the diagnostic accuracy of US for the detection of periapical lesions in comparison with PA and CBCT. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the measurement precision of US against PA and CBCT in detecting periapical lesions. Methods: This study included 43 maxillary and mandibular teeth with periapical lesions. All teeth were examined clinically, radiographically, and ultrasonographically. Observers evaluated and measured the periapical lesions on CBCT, PA, and US images. Results: The comparison of lesion size showed that it differs significantly between the different methods of examination. A statistically significant difference was found between CBCT and US (mean difference = 0.99 mm, 95% CI [0.43–1.55]), as well as between CBCT and PA (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI [0.17–1.05]). No difference was found between the US and PA methods (p = 0.193). Conclusion: US cannot replace PA radiography in detecting pathologies but it can accurately measure and characterize periapical lesions with minimal radiation exposure. CBCT is the most precise and radiation-intensive method so it should only be used for complex cases.

Keywords