PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of two imaging modes in a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) system in detecting root fracture in endodontically-treated teeth with fiber posts or screw posts by selecting two fields of view. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 78 endodontically-treated single canal premolars were included. A post space was created in all of them. Then the teeth were randomly set in one of 6 artificial dental arches. In 39 of the 78 teeth set in the 6 dental arches, a root fracture was intentionally created. Next, a fiber post and a screw post were cemented into 26 teeth having equal the root fractures. High resolution (HiRes) and standard zoom images were provided by a CBCT device. Upon considering the reconstructed images, two observers in agreement with each other confirmed the presence or absence of root fracture. A McNemar test was used for comparing the results of the two modes. RESULTS: The frequency of making a correct diagnosis using the HiRes zoom imaging mode was 71.8% and in standard zoom was 59%. The overall sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing root fracture in the HiRes mode were 71.79% and 46.15% and in the standard zoom modes were 58.97% and 33.33%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences between the diagnostic values of the two imaging modes used in the diagnosis of root fracture or in the presence of root canal restorations. In both modes, the most true-positive results were reported in the post space group.
Bicuspid ; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography ; Dental Arch ; Dental Pulp Cavity ; Intention ; Nerve Fibers, Myelinated ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tooth ; Tooth Fractures ; Tooth, Nonvital

PURPOSE: Field of view and voxel resolution of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) might affect the diagnostic capability. This study was performed to compare between the standard and HiRes zoom modes in the diagnosis of external root resorption (ERR) using CBCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty three small cavities (0.25 mm depth and 0.5 mm diameter) were simulated on the buccal, lingual, and proximal surfaces at three different levels of 16 roots of teeth. After covering the root with nail varnish, the roots were inserted in the sockets and the model was placed in a water-containing lacuna. CBCT scans were taken in both standard and HiRes zoom modes using NewTom VG (QR srl Company, Verona, Italy). Then, an observer assessed the images to determine the presence or absence of the cavities. This process was repeated by increasing the size and depth of cavities to 0.5 mm depth and 1 mm diameter. Data were analyzed by McNemar test. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio in evaluation of the simulated cavities were calculated. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the two imaging modes in diagnosing the shallow cavities (p=0.02).The sensitivity of the standard zoom in detecting the shallow cavities was lower than that of the HiRes zoom. The likelihood ratio of the HiRes zoom was higher in the diagnosis of both cavity types. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that a smaller voxel size in the HiRes zoom mode of CBCT is preferred for diagnosis of ERR.
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography ; Nails ; Paint ; Root Resorption ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tooth