Comparative evaluation of advanced and conventional diagnostic AIDS for endodontic management of periapical lesions, an in vivo study

Can ultrasonography be used to determine working length in endodontic treatment? An in vitro study

This study was conducted to evaluate efficacy of ultrasonography (USG) in determining working length in in-vitro conditions. Twenty five access cavities of maxillary incisor teeth were opened and actual working lengths (AWL) were measured with dental operating microscope. The working length were then measured with an electronic apex locator and USG. USG and apex locator measurements were statistically analyzed using one sample t-test and compared with AWL. The mean AWL measurment was 20.68 mm. USG measured the working length slightly longer (21.09 mm) than the measurements of apex locator (20.64 mm). Statistical analysis showed that the USG method provided similar measurements to electronic apex locators and with no statistical difference with actual working length (P < .05). USG emerges as a promising method for working length measurement that allows simultaneous visualization of root tip anatomy in cases where electronic apex locators may be insufficient and there is buccal cortical bone loss.

The applications of ultrasound, and ultrasonography in dentistry: a scoping review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to summarize the available literature on the clinical applications of ultrasonography and ultrasound in diagnostic, therapeutic, and interventional dental applications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist and conducted a protocol-driven scoping review of randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and case series that assessed ultrasonography or ultrasound use as a stand-alone diagnostic, therapeutic, and interventional tool in dentistry. We included studies published after 1980, study samples ≥ 10, with diagnostic, concordance, or therapeutic outcomes. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and others (up to April 2021) and extracted information regarding study level, patient level, test or treatment level, and outcome level data.

RESULTS

Five interventional studies (related to oral medicine, temporomandibular disorders, and dental anesthesia), eight therapeutic studies (related to surgery and orthodontics), and seventy-five diagnostic studies (related to orthodontics, surgery, endodontics, oral medicine, temporomandibular disorders, restorative dentistry, and periodontology) were identified and presented in this review.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasonography has a well-established niche in diagnostic dentistry, while therapeutic and interventional ultrasounds have a smaller, yet present, niche in dentistry. However, further research is needed to report the precise estimates of the diagnostic, therapeutic, and interventional effects.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Dentists are mostly unfamiliar with ultrasonography and ultrasound and their potential uses. This review maps the diagnostic and therapeutic applications of ultrasonography and ultrasound technology in dentistry and highlights the current challenges, gaps of knowledge, and research status of ultrasound technology in this regard.

In vitro assessment of periapical lesions created in sheep mandibles by using high resolution ultrasonography and cone beam computed tomography

OBJECTIVES

Providing ultrasound images of periapical lesions may be problematic depending on the thickness of the overlying cortical bone. Clinically, it is crucial to determine the cut-off value of overlaying bone thickness in terms of interference with ultrasound imaging in conjunction with assessment of changes in periapical jaw bone lesions. Our aim was to determine the minimum amount of overlaying buccal bone thickness of artificial periapical lesions in order to be visible by ultrasound imaging and to compare width, height, depth, surface area and volume measurements of detectable periapical lesions obtained from ultrasound and CBCT images.

METHODS

Periapical lesions were created in 16 molar teeth of sheep mandibles. Cavities were enlarged until the borders of lesions were visible on 14 MHz hockey probe ultrasound imaging. CBCT and ultrasound images were obtained simultaneously after drilling and enlarging each size of the cavities and replacing the teeth in their sockets. two observers separately assessed images twice within 2 weeks of interval. By using CBCT and ultrasound images, buccal bone thickness, maximum width, height, depth, surface area and volume of periapical lesions were measured. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was utilized and significance level was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean buccal bone thickness ranged between 1.21 mm and 1.31 mm for both imaging techniques. For the measurement of buccal bone thickness, periapical lesion width, height, depth, surface area, and volume excellent ICC values were found in terms of intrarater (ranging between 0.907 and 1) and inter-rater (ranging between 0.864 and 1) reliability for both observers and their readings. There were no statistically significant differences for both observers and for their two readings between ultrasound and CBCT measurements of buccal bone thickness, and periapical lesion width and height (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We suggested that a buccal thickness of approximately 1.28 mm might be accepted as a cut-off value for the detection of periapical lesions with 14 MHz hockey probe ultrasound. High resolution ultrasound provided accurate information for the measurement of buccal bone thickness and lesion width and height.

Ultrasound Imaging versus Radiographs in Differentiating Periapical Lesions: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Ultrasonography is a non-invasive method of diagnosing periapical lesions while radiologic methods are more common. Periapical lesions due to endodontic infection are one of the most common causes of periapical radiolucency that need to be distinguished to help determine the course of treatment. This review aimed to examine the accuracy of ultrasound and compare it to radiographs in distinguishing these lesions in vivo.

METHODS

This review process followed the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science) was conducted without any restrictions on time. Articles available in English were included. The selection was done according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the quality of the studies.

RESULTS

The search provided a total of 87 articles, out of which, five were selected for the final review. In all the studies, ultrasound had higher accuracy in distinguishing periapical lesions. All the studies indicated a risk of bias, especially in patient selection.

CONCLUSION

Within limitations, the study indicates that ultrasound is a better diagnostic tool to distinguish periapical lesions compared to radiographs but further studies with well-designed, rigorous protocols and low risk of bias are needed to provide stronger evidence.

Diagnostic accuracy of panoramic radiography and ultrasonography in detecting periapical lesions using periapical radiography as a gold standard

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of imaging techniques in diagnosing periapical lesions.

METHODS

Imaging records of 80 patients (51 females, 29 males, aged between 14 and 75 years) including periapical and panoramic radiographs and ultrasonographic images were selected from databases of Selcuk University Dentistry Faculty. Periapical radiographs were accepted as gold-standard and 160 anterior maxillary and mandibular teeth with or without periapical lesion were included to the study. Three specialist observers (dental radiologists) evaluated the presence and appearance of periapical lesions on panoramic radiograph and ultrasonographic images.Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic value of panoramic radiographs and ultrasonography were determined.

RESULTS

Sensitivity was 0.80 and 0.77 for ultrasonographic images and panoramic radiographs, respectively which shows that periapical lesion was correctly detected in 80% of the cases with ultrasound and in 77% of the cases with panoramic radiography. Specificity values were determined as 0.97 for ultrasound and 0.95 for panoramic radiography. Overall diagnostic accuracy was 0.86 and 0.84 for ultrasound and panoramic radiography, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Periapical and panoramic radiographs are commonly used to visualize periapical lesions. Besides, ultrasonography is an alternative method to digital radiographic techniques in the diagnosis of anterior teeth with periapical lesions.

Versatility of high resolution ultrasonography in the assessment of granulomas and radicular cysts: a comparative in vivo study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of high resolution ultrasound with periapical radiographs (PR) and CBCT in assessing granulomas and radicular cysts.

METHODS

This study included a total of 33 teeth from 33 patients with periapical lesions. Subjects were distributed among three groups. A consisted of teeth that were extracted. B consisted of teeth treated with root-canal treatment followed by apical surgery. C consisted of teeth treated with root-canal treatment only. Pre-treatment PR, ultrasound and CBCT images were obtained for Groups A, B and C and 6 month post-treatment PR and ultrasound images were obtained for Groups B and C. In addition, histopathological analysis was performed on lesions in Groups A and B. Lesions were classified as either cystic lesions or granulomas. Width, height, depth, surface area and volume of lesions were measured using the built-in softwares of the appropriate imaging modalities. Measurements were compared by Wilcoxon and paired sample t tests. Ultrasound and histopathological findings were compared with κ and Mc Nemar. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

κ coefficient (0.667; p = 0.002) suggested good agreement between ultrasound and histopathology. No statistically significant differences were found among periapical radiography, CBCT and ultrasound in the pre-treatment measurements of lesion width ( p = 0.308) or between CBCT and periapical radiography in the pre-treatment measurements of lesion height ( p = 0.863). In all cases, mean measurement values for all variables were lower for ultrasound than for CBCT.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound provided useful information for the diagnosis and assessment of granulomas and radicular cysts.