Updating Health Technology Assessment Report, CBCT Technology
Abstract
Context: Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) is a medical imaging technology with various dental applications, and diagnosis of oral and maxillofacial lesions. The main purpose of the study is to update safety and efficacy of CBCT technology.
Materials and Methods: Since the time searching in the previous report was up to December 2010, electronic databases including Cochrane and Scopus have been searched from January 2011 to June 2014. In the first step, based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, title, abstract and full-text of articles were reviewed by two independent reviewers. In some cases, the full-text of articles was not available, so contact with author of article and the full-text was obtained. Also, non-English language articles were excluded from this study. At the next stage, all final papers were critically appraised and appropriate data were extracted. We have used the designed form in the previous report to extract data and information on the included articles. Due to the heterogeneity in studies, results were reported in descriptive and qualitative manners.
Results: After removing duplicate articles, a total of 876 articles were included in this study. Finally, 23 studies were reached the final analysis stage. In terms of quality, 13 articles were of average quality and 10 articles were of good quality. Most of the studies have been related to Iran (5 cases), Brazil (4 cases), Germany (3 cases), Britain, USA and, Netherlands (each country has 2 studies) and, Turkey, China, India and, Switzerland (each country has 2 studies). The included studies have been conducted in 2011 (8 cases), 2012 (6 cases), 2013 (5 cases) and, 2014 (4 cases), respectively. 1806 samples were reviewed in all included studies. Most of important reported cases include sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive value, and under area curve. 86.3% of the studies reported sensitivity and specificity (19 studies), accuracy (8 studies), area under the curve (8 studies). Positive and negative predictive values were 36.3% and 27.2%, respectively.
Conclusions: CBCT imaging is highly sensitive to the diagnosis of various types of lesions in oral. However, due to the limit number of clinical trials and the lack of evidence, further studies are needed to make stronger decisions.
2. Greenall C, Thomas B, Drage N, Brown J. An audit of image quality of three dental cone beam computed tomography units. Radiography. 2016;22(1):56-9.
3. Bornstein MM, Lauber R, Sendi P, Von Arx T. Comparison of periapical radiography and limited cone-beam computed tomography in mandibular molars for analysis of anatomical landmarks before apical surgery. Journal of Endodontics. 2011;37(2):151-7.
4. Edlund R, Skorpil M, Lapidus G, Bäcklund J. Cone-beam CT in diagnosis of scaphoid fractures. Skeletal radiology. 2016;45(2):197-204.
5. Centenero SA-H, Hernández-Alfaro F. 3D planning in orthognathic surgery: CAD/CAM surgical splints and prediction of the soft and hard tissues results–our experience in 16 cases. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2012;40(2):162-8.
6. Signorelli L, Patcas R, Peltomäki T, Schätzle M. Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics/Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2016;77(1):9-15.
7. Perényi Á, Bella Z, Baráth Z, Magyar P, Nagy K, Rovó L. Role of cone-beam computed tomography in diagnostic otorhinolaryngological imaging. Orvosihetilap. 2016;157(2):52-8.
8. Su N, Liu Y, Yang X, Luo Z, Shi Z. Correlation between bony changes measured with cone beam computed tomography and clinical dysfunction index in patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. 2014;42(7):1402-7.
9. Shaabaninejad H, Akbari Sari A, Rafiei S, Mehrabi Sari A, Safi Y. The Efficacy of CBCT for Diagnosis and Treatment of Oral and Maxil-lofacial Disorders: A Systematic Review. Journal of Islamic Dental Association of Iran. 2014;26(1):64-74.
10. Guerrero ME, Nackaerts O, Beinsberger J, Horner K, Schoenaers J, Jacobs R, et al. Inferior alveolar nerve sensory disturbance after impacted mandibular third molar evaluation using cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography: a pilot study. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2012;70(10):2264-70.
11. Jadu F, Lam E. A comparative study of the diagnostic capabilities of 2D plain radiograph and 3D cone beam CT sialography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2013;42(1):20110319-.
12. Liang YH, Yuan M, Li G, Shemesh H, Wesselink PR, Wu MK. The ability of cone‐beam computed tomography to detect simulated buccal and lingual recesses in root canals. International endodontic journal. 2012;45(8):724-9.
13. Pigg M, List T, Abul-Kasim K, Maly P, Petersson A. A comparative analysis of magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic examinations of patients with atypical odontalgia. Journal of Oral & Facial Pain & Headache. 2014;28(3).
14. Leiva-Salinas C, Flors L, Gras P, Más-Estellés F, Lemercier P, Patrie J, et al. Dental flat panel conebeam CT in the evaluation of patients with inflammatory sinonasal disease: diagnostic efficacy and radiation dose savings. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2014;35(11):2052-7.
15. Huang L, Park K, Boike T, Lee P, Papiez L, Solberg T, et al. A study on the dosimetric accuracy of treatment planning for stereotactic body radiation therapy of lung cancer using average and maximum intensity projection images. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2010;96(1):48-54.
16. Xie X, Zhang Z. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography and eight-slice computed tomography for evaluation of external root reabsorption. Beijing da xuexuebao Yi xue ban= Journal of Peking University Health sciences. 2012;44(4):628-32.
17. Bechara B, McMahan CA, Noujeim M, Faddoul T, Moore WS, Teixeira FB, et al. Comparison of cone beam CT scans with enhanced photostimulated phosphor plate images in the detection of root fracture of endodontically treated teeth. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2013;42(7):20120404.
18. da Silveira PF, Vizzotto MB, Liedke GS, da Silveira HLD, Montagner F, da Silveira HED. Detection of vertical root fractures by conventional radiographic examination and cone beam computed tomography–an in vitro analysis. Dental Traumatology. 2013;29(1):41-6.
19. Jakobson SJM, Westphalen VPD, Silva Neto U, Fariniuk LF, Schroeder AGD, Carneiro E. The influence of metallic posts in the detection of vertical root fractures using different imaging examinations. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2013;43(1):20130287.
20. Khedmat S, Rouhi N, Drage N, Shokouhinejad N, Nekoofar M. Evaluation of three imaging techniques for the detection of vertical root fractures in the absence and presence of gutta‐percha root fillings. International endodontic journal. 2012;45(11):1004-9.
21. Valiozadeh S, Khosravi M, Azizi Z. Diagnostic accuracy of conventional, digital and Cone Beam CT in vertical root fracture detection. Iranian Endodontic Journal. 2011;6(1):15-20.
22. Wang P, Yan X, Lui D, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Ma X. Detection of dental root fractures by using cone-beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2011;40(5):290-8.
23. Durack C, Patel S, Davies J, Wilson R, Mannocci F. Diagnostic accuracy of small volume cone beam computed tomography and intraoral periapical radiography for the detection of simulated external inflammatory root resorption. International Endodontic Journal. 2011;44(2):136-47.
24. Gaia BF, Sales MAOd, Perrella A, Fenyo-Pereira M, Cavalcanti MGP. Comparison between cone-beam and multislice computed tomography for identification of simulated bone lesions. Brazilian oral research. 2011;25(4):362-8.
25. Sansare K, Singh D, Sontakke S, Karjodkar F, Saxena V, Frydenberg M, et al. Should cavitation in proximal surfaces be reported in cone beam computed tomography examination? Caries research. 2014;48(3):208-13.
26. Wenzel A, Hirsch E, Christensen J, Matzen LH, Scaf G, Frydenberg M. Detection of cavitatedapproximal surfaces using cone beam CT and intraoral receptors. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2013;42(1):39458105-.
27. Haghanifar S, Moudi E, Mesgarani A, Bijani A, Abbaszadeh N. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography in detecting mandibular molars root perforations. Imaging science in dentistry. 2014;44(2):115-9.
28. Shemesh H, Cristescu RC, Wesselink PR, Wu M-K. The use of cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiographs to diagnose root perforations. Journal of endodontics. 2011;37(4):513-6.
29. Hakim SG, Wieker H, Trenkle T, Sieg P, Konitzer J, Holl-Ulrich K, et al. Imaging of mandible invasion by oral squamous cell carcinoma using computed tomography, cone-beam computed tomography and bone scintigraphy with SPECT. Clinical oral investigations. 2014;18(3):961-7.
30. Shokri A, Falah-Kooshki S, Poorolajal J, Karimi A, Ostovarrad F. Evaluation of the location of mandibular foramen as an anatomic landmark using CBCT images: a pioneering study in an iranian population. Brazilian Dental Science. 2014;17(4):74-81.
31. Kayipmaz S, Sezgin ÖS, Saricaoğlu ST, Çan G. An in vitro comparison of diagnostic abilities of conventional radiography, storage phosphor, and cone beam computed tomography to determine occlusal and approximal caries. European journal of radiology. 2011;80(2):478-82.
32. Rathore S, Tyndall D, Wright J, Everett E. Ex vivo comparison of Galileos cone beam CT and intraoral radiographs in detecting occlusal caries. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2012;41(6):489-93.
33. Zain-Alabdeen E, Alsadhan R. A comparative study of accuracy of detection of surface osseous changes in the temporomandibular joint using multidetector CT and cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2012;41(3):185-91.
34. Wriedt S, Jaklin J, Al-Nawas B, Wehrbein H. Impacted upper canines: examination and treatment proposal based on 3D versus 2D diagnosis. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics/Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2012;73(1):28-40.
35. Dreiseidler T, Alarabi N, Ritter L, Rothamel D, Scheer M, Zöller JE, et al. A comparison of multislice computerized tomography, cone-beam computerized tomography, and single photon emission computerized tomography for the assessment of bone invasion by oral malignancies. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2011;112(3):367-74.
36. Shokri A, Mortazavi H, Salemi F, Javadian A, Bakhtiari H, Matlabi H. Diagnosis of simulated external root resorption using conventional intraoral film radiography, CCD, PSP, and CBCT: a comparison study. Biomedical journal. 2013;36(1):18-22.
37. Vizzotto M, Silveira P, Arus N, Montagner F, Gomes B, Silveira Hd. CBCT for the assessment of second mesiobuccal (MB 2) canals in maxillary molar teeth: effect of voxel size and presence of root filling. International endodontic journal. 2013;46(9):870-6.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 3, No 1 (2019) | |
| Section | Review Article | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/htaa.v3i1.5851 | |
| Keywords | ||
| CBCT Oral Diseases Dental Diseases Cone-Beam Computed Tomography | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
