Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of 2 root surface area measurement methods: 3-dimensional laser scanning and cone-beam computed tomography

  • Tasanapanont, Jintana (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Apisariyakul, Janya (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Wattanachai, Tanapan (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University) ;
  • Sriwilas, Patiyut (Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University) ;
  • Midtbo, Marit (Department of Clinical Dentistry - Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen) ;
  • Jotikasthira, Dhirawat (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University)
  • Received : 2016.10.31
  • Accepted : 2017.02.08
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the use of 3-dimensional (3D) laser scanning and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as methods of root surface measurement. Materials and Methods: Thirty teeth (15 maxillary first premolars and 15 mandibular first premolars) from 8 patients who required extractions for orthodontic treatment were selected. Before extraction, pre-treatment CBCT images of all the patients were recorded. First, a CBCT image was imported into simulation software (Mimics version 15.01; Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) and the root surface area of each tooth was calculated using 3-Matic (version 7.01, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). After extraction, all the teeth were scanned and the root surface area of each extracted tooth was calculated. The root surface areas calculated using these 2 measurement methods were analyzed using the paired t-test (P<.05). Correlations between the 2 methods were determined by calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. The intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC) was used to assess intraobserver reliability. Results: The root surface area measurements ($230.11{\pm}41.97mm^2$) obtained using CBCT were slightly greater than those ($229.31{\pm}42.46mm^2$) obtained using 3D laser scanning, but not significantly (P=.425). A high Pearson correlation coefficient was found between the CBCT and the 3D laser scanner measurements. The intraobserver ICC was 1.000 for 3D laser scanning and 0.990 for CBCT. Conclusion: This study presents a novel CBCT approach for measuring the root surface area; this technique can be used for estimating the root surface area of non-extracted teeth.

Keywords

References

  1. Hujoel PP. A meta-analysis of normal ranges for root surface areas of the permanent dentition. J Clin Periodontol 1994; 21: 225-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1994.tb00310.x
  2. Mowry JK, Ching MG, Orjansen MD, Cobb CM, Friesen LR, MacNeill SR, et al. Root surface area of the mandibular cuspid and bicuspids. J Periodontol 2002; 73: 1095-100. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2002.73.10.1095
  3. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006; 72: 75-80.
  4. Li G. Patient radiation dose and protection from cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2013; 43: 63-9. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2013.43.2.63
  5. Reuschl RP, Heuer W, Stiesch M, Wenzel D, Dittmer MP. Reliability and validity of measurements on digital study models and plaster models. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 22-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv001
  6. Jepsen A. Root surface measurement and a method for x-ray determination of root surface area. Acta Odontol Scand 1963; 21: 35-46. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356309019777
  7. Nicholls JI, Daly CH, Kydd WL. Root surface measurement using a digital computer. J Dent Res 1974; 53: 1338-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345740530060701
  8. Luthra SP, Narayan I, Subrahmanyam N. Root surface area measured by the benzene adsorption method. J Prosthet Dent 1974; 31: 185-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(74)90054-7
  9. Pan JH, Chen SK, Lin CH, Leu LC, Chen CM, Jeng JY. Estimation of single-root surface area from true thickness data and from thickness derived from digital dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33: 312-7. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/19746488
  10. Li W, Chen F, Zhang F, Ding W, Ye Q, Shi J, et al. Volumetric measurement of root resorption following molar mini-screw implant intrusion using cone beam computed tomography. PLoS One 2013; 8: e60962. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060962
  11. Gu Y, Tang Y, Zhu Q, Feng X. Measurement of root surface area of permanent teeth with root variations in a Chinese population-A micro-CT analysis. Arch Oral Biol 2016; 63: 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.12.001
  12. Taylor TT, Gans SI, Jones EM, Firestone AR, Johnston WM, Kim DG. Comparison of micro-CT and cone beam CT-based assessments for relative difference of grey level distribution in a human mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 25117764. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/25117764
  13. Anderson PJ, Yong R, Surman TL, Rajion ZA, Ranjitkar S. Application of three-dimensional computed tomography in craniofacial clinical practice and research. Aust Dent J 2014; 59 Suppl 1: 174-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12154
  14. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 219-26. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/14340323
  15. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 106: 106-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.018