重庆医学
重慶醫學
중경의학
CHONGQING MEDICAL JOURNAL
2014年
19期
2404-2406
,共3页
董艳玲%陈军%邓锋%郑雷蕾%任洪芋
董豔玲%陳軍%鄧鋒%鄭雷蕾%任洪芋
동염령%진군%산봉%정뢰뢰%임홍우
牙根吸收%锥形束CT%根尖片%正畸治疗
牙根吸收%錐形束CT%根尖片%正畸治療
아근흡수%추형속CT%근첨편%정기치료
root resorption%cone-beam computed tomography%periapical radiography%orthodontic treatment
目的:比较锥形束C T (CBC T )和根尖片诊断根尖区牙根外吸收(根尖吸收)的准确性。方法选取160颗单根前磨牙,用以模拟4种不同程度的根尖吸收:无、轻度、中度、重度。模拟完成后,对所有牙齿拍摄CBC T 和根尖片获取两组影像学资料。正畸医师通过对影像学资料的分析独立地评估所有牙齿根尖吸收程度。采用McNemar检验对比分析两种成像技术诊断不同程度根尖吸收的准确率。结果 CBC T 诊断无、轻度、中度、重度及总的根尖吸收的准确率分别为95.0%、97.5%、42.5%、87.5%和80.6%,而根尖片的准确率分别为85.0%、42.5%、70.0%、92.5%和72.5%,两种成像技术轻度、中度及总根尖吸收的诊断结果比较差异有统计学意义( P<0.05)。结论相比于根尖片,CBC T对根尖吸收具有更高的检出率,但其对中度吸收的敏感性较低。在正畸临床中,CBC T可用于对根尖吸收进行早期诊断,从而为继续或修正当前的正畸治疗提供必要的参考意见。
目的:比較錐形束C T (CBC T )和根尖片診斷根尖區牙根外吸收(根尖吸收)的準確性。方法選取160顆單根前磨牙,用以模擬4種不同程度的根尖吸收:無、輕度、中度、重度。模擬完成後,對所有牙齒拍攝CBC T 和根尖片穫取兩組影像學資料。正畸醫師通過對影像學資料的分析獨立地評估所有牙齒根尖吸收程度。採用McNemar檢驗對比分析兩種成像技術診斷不同程度根尖吸收的準確率。結果 CBC T 診斷無、輕度、中度、重度及總的根尖吸收的準確率分彆為95.0%、97.5%、42.5%、87.5%和80.6%,而根尖片的準確率分彆為85.0%、42.5%、70.0%、92.5%和72.5%,兩種成像技術輕度、中度及總根尖吸收的診斷結果比較差異有統計學意義( P<0.05)。結論相比于根尖片,CBC T對根尖吸收具有更高的檢齣率,但其對中度吸收的敏感性較低。在正畸臨床中,CBC T可用于對根尖吸收進行早期診斷,從而為繼續或脩正噹前的正畸治療提供必要的參攷意見。
목적:비교추형속C T (CBC T )화근첨편진단근첨구아근외흡수(근첨흡수)적준학성。방법선취160과단근전마아,용이모의4충불동정도적근첨흡수:무、경도、중도、중도。모의완성후,대소유아치박섭CBC T 화근첨편획취량조영상학자료。정기의사통과대영상학자료적분석독입지평고소유아치근첨흡수정도。채용McNemar검험대비분석량충성상기술진단불동정도근첨흡수적준학솔。결과 CBC T 진단무、경도、중도、중도급총적근첨흡수적준학솔분별위95.0%、97.5%、42.5%、87.5%화80.6%,이근첨편적준학솔분별위85.0%、42.5%、70.0%、92.5%화72.5%,량충성상기술경도、중도급총근첨흡수적진단결과비교차이유통계학의의( P<0.05)。결론상비우근첨편,CBC T대근첨흡수구유경고적검출솔,단기대중도흡수적민감성교저。재정기림상중,CBC T가용우대근첨흡수진행조기진단,종이위계속혹수정당전적정기치료제공필요적삼고의견。
Objective To compare the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT ) and periapical radiography in the diagnosis of simulated external apical root resorption (EARR) .Methods The study sample comprised 160 single-rooted premolars for simulating 4 degrees of EARR :no(intact teeth) ,mild(cavity of 1 .0 mm in diameter and depth in root surface) ,moderate(1 .0 mm root shortening) ,and severe(3 .0 mm root shortening) .Two sets of radiographic images were acquired with CBCT and periapi-cal radiography .The severity for all resorption lesions were evaluated blindly by one calibrated examiner .The percentages of correct classification of each degree of EARR were compared between the two imaging techniques using McNemar test .Results With CBCT method ,the percentages of correct classification of no ,mild ,moderate ,severe and all EARR were 95 .0% ,97 .5% ,42 .5% , 87 .5% and 80 .6% ,respectively ;with periapical radiography method ,the percentages were 85 .0% ,42 .5% ,70 .0% ,92 .5% and 72 .5% ,respectively .Significant differences were found between the two imaging techniques for evaluating mild ,moderate ,and all-EARR(P<0 .05) .Conclusion CBCT imaging is more reliable than periapical radiography for detecting EARR ,whereas it is not sensitive to moderate root shortening .In orthodontic practices ,CBCT could be applied to the early diagnosis of EARR ,in order to help make the decision on continuation and modification of orthodontic treatment .