Accuracy of Periapical Radiography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scans in Diagnosing Apical Periodontitis Using Histopathological Findings as a Gold Standard

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of two imaging methods in diagnosing apical periodontitis (AP) using histopathological findings as a gold standard. Methods: The periapex of 83 treated or untreated roots of dogs` teeth was examined using periapical radiography (PR), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans, and histology. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of PR and CBCT diagnosis were calculated. Results: PR detected AP in 71% of roots, a CBCT scan detected AP in 84%, and AP was histologically diagnosed in 93% (p = 0.001). Overall, sensitivity was 0.77 and 0.91 for PR and CBCT, respectively. Specificity was 1 for both. Negative predictive value was 0.25 and 0.46 for PR and CBCT, respectively. Positive predictive value was 1 for both. Diagnostic accuracy (true positives + true negatives) was 0.78 and 0.92 for PR and CBCT (p = 0.028), respectively. Conclusion: A CBCT scan was more sensitive in detecting AP compared with PR, which was more likely to miss AP when it was still present. (J Endod 2009;35:1009-1012)

Outcome of Root Canal Treatment in Dogs Determined by Periapical Radiography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scans

The purpose of this study was to compare the favorable outcome of root canal treatment determined by periapical radiographs (PRs) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Ninety-six roots of dogs` teeth were used to form four groups (n = 24). In group 1, root canal treatments were performed in healthy teeth. Root canals in groups 2 through 4 were infected until apical periodontitis (AP) was radiographically confirmed. Roots with AP were treated by one-visit therapy in group 2, by two-visit therapy in group 3, and left untreated in group 4. The radiolucent area in the PRs and the volume of CBCT-scanned periapical lesions were measured before and 6 months after the treatment. In groups 1, 2, and 3, a favorable outcome (lesions absent or reduced) was shown in 57 (79%) roots using PRs but only in 25 (35%) roots using CBCT scans (p = 0.0001). Unfavorable outcomes occurred more frequently after one-visit therapy than two-visit therapy when determined by CBCT scans (p = 0.023). (J Endod 2009; 35:723-726)