Comparison of micro-computerized tomography and cone-beam computerized tomography in the detection of accessory canals in primary molars

PURPOSE: This study was performed to compare the accuracy of micro-computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting accessory canals in primary molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one extracted human primary first and second molars were embedded in wax blocks and scanned using micro-CT and CBCT. After the images were taken, the samples were processed using a clearing technique and examined under a stereomicroscope in order to establish the gold standard for this study. The specimens were classified into three groups: maxillary molars, mandibular molars with three canals, and mandibular molars with four canals. Differences between the gold standard and the observations made using the imaging methods were calculated using Spearman's rho correlation coefficient test. RESULTS: The presence of accessory canals in micro-CT images of maxillary and mandibular root canals showed a statistically significant correlation with the stereomicroscopic images used as a gold standard. No statistically significant correlation was found between the CBCT findings and the stereomicroscopic images. CONCLUSION: Although micro-CT is not suitable for clinical use, it provides more detailed information about minor anatomical structures. However, CBCT is convenient for clinical use but may not be capable of adequately analyzing the internal anatomy of primary teeth.

Accuracy of virtual models in the assessment of maxillary defects

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the reliability of measurements performed on three-dimensional (3D) virtual models of maxillary defects obtained using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and 3D optical scanning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mechanical cavities simulating maxillary defects were prepared on the hard palate of nine cadavers. Images were obtained using a CBCT unit at three different fields-of-views (FOVs) and voxel sizes: 1) 60x60 mm FOV, 0.125 mm3 (FOV60); 2) 80x80 mm FOV, 0.160 mm3 (FOV80); and 3) 100x100 mm FOV, 0.250 mm3 (FOV100). Superimposition of the images was performed using software called VRMesh Design. Automated volume measurements were conducted, and differences between surfaces were demonstrated. Silicon impressions obtained from the defects were also scanned with a 3D optical scanner. Virtual models obtained using VRMesh Design were compared with impressions obtained by scanning silicon models. Gold standard volumes of the impression models were then compared with CBCT and 3D scanner measurements. Further, the general linear model was used, and the significance was set to p=0.05. RESULTS: A comparison of the results obtained by the observers and methods revealed the p values to be smaller than 0.05, suggesting that the measurement variations were caused by both methods and observers along with the different cadaver specimens used. Further, the 3D scanner measurements were closer to the gold standard measurements when compared to the CBCT measurements. CONCLUSION: In the assessment of artificially created maxillary defects, the 3D scanner measurements were more accurate than the CBCT measurements.