中华口腔医学杂志
中華口腔醫學雜誌
중화구강의학잡지
Chinese Journal of Stomatology
2011年
z1期
1-5
,共5页
程俊歌%张智玲%王晓燕%李刚%张祖燕%马绪臣
程俊歌%張智玲%王曉燕%李剛%張祖燕%馬緒臣
정준가%장지령%왕효연%리강%장조연%마서신
龋齿%诊断显像%放射摄影术,牙科,数字%锥形束CT
齲齒%診斷顯像%放射攝影術,牙科,數字%錐形束CT
우치%진단현상%방사섭영술,아과,수자%추형속CT
Dental caries%Diagnostic imaging%Radiography,dental,digital%Cone-beam CT
目的 比较锥形束CT( cone beam computed tomography,CBCT)与数字口内X线片对邻面龋诊断的准确性,为临床提供适宜的检查手段.方法 5名观察者对45颗离体牙CBCT图像和数字口内片影像进行评估后得出受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)曲线.结果 邻面龋(牙釉质+牙本质)诊断中CBCT与数字口内片比较,差异无统计学意义(P =0.186);单纯分析牙本质龋:CBCT与数字口内片比较差异有统计学意义(P =0.004);单纯分析牙釉质龋:CBCT与数字口内片比较差异无统计学意义(P =0.885).结论 虽然诊断邻面牙本质龋时CBCT优于数字口内片,但因其辐射剂量因素,故不推荐使用CBCT诊断邻面龋.
目的 比較錐形束CT( cone beam computed tomography,CBCT)與數字口內X線片對鄰麵齲診斷的準確性,為臨床提供適宜的檢查手段.方法 5名觀察者對45顆離體牙CBCT圖像和數字口內片影像進行評估後得齣受試者工作特徵(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)麯線.結果 鄰麵齲(牙釉質+牙本質)診斷中CBCT與數字口內片比較,差異無統計學意義(P =0.186);單純分析牙本質齲:CBCT與數字口內片比較差異有統計學意義(P =0.004);單純分析牙釉質齲:CBCT與數字口內片比較差異無統計學意義(P =0.885).結論 雖然診斷鄰麵牙本質齲時CBCT優于數字口內片,但因其輻射劑量因素,故不推薦使用CBCT診斷鄰麵齲.
목적 비교추형속CT( cone beam computed tomography,CBCT)여수자구내X선편대린면우진단적준학성,위림상제공괄의적검사수단.방법 5명관찰자대45과리체아CBCT도상화수자구내편영상진행평고후득출수시자공작특정(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)곡선.결과 린면우(아유질+아본질)진단중CBCT여수자구내편비교,차이무통계학의의(P =0.186);단순분석아본질우:CBCT여수자구내편비교차이유통계학의의(P =0.004);단순분석아유질우:CBCT여수자구내편비교차이무통계학의의(P =0.885).결론 수연진단린면아본질우시CBCT우우수자구내편,단인기복사제량인소,고불추천사용CBCT진단린면우.
Objective To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and digital intraoral radiography in the detection of proximal caries.Methods Forty-five non-restored human premolars or molars were selected for the study.The teeth,4 or 5 as a group,were mounted in 11 plaster blocks.The CBCT images of the tooth blocks were acquired with the ProMax 3D and the DCT Pro imaging systems,while the digital intraoral radiographs were obtained by a digital imaging system Digora Optime.Five postgraduates evaluated all the images for carious lesion in the 90 proximal surfaces using a five-level scale.With the histological examination serving as the reference standard,observers' performances were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.Results Fifty-eight proximal surfaces were sound,18 had enamel caries and 14 had dentine caries.No significant differences was found among the three modalities for the proximal caries detection ( P =0.186 ).When only the dentine caries was analyzed,significant difference was found between CBCT and digital intraoral radiography (P =0.004).No significant difference was noted when only enamel caries was analyzed (P =0.885 ).Conclusions Although CBCT was better than digital intraoral radiography in the detection accuracy of proximal caries,however,considering the relatively higher radiation dose,CBCT should not be used routinely to diagnose proximal caries in clinic.