Clinical Research

Accuracy of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Panoramic and Periapical Radiography for Detection of Apical Periodontitis
Carlos Estrela, DDS, MSc, PhD,* Mike Reis Bueno, DDS, MSc, Cludio Rodrigues Leles, DDS, MSc, PhD, Bruno Azevedo, DDS, MSc, and Jos Ribamar Azevedo, DDS
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of imaging methods for detection of apical periodontitis (AP). Imaging records from a consecutive sample of 888 imaging exams of patients with endodontic infection (1508 teeth), including cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic and periapical radiographs, were selected. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of periapical and panoramic radiographs were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the panoramic and periapical images. Prevalence of AP was significantly higher with CBCT. Overall sensitivity was 0.55 and 0.28 for periapical and panoramic radiographs, respectively. ROC curves and area under curve (AUC) with periapical radiography showed a high accuracy for the cutoff value of 5 for both periapical (AUC, 0.90) and panoramic (AUC, 0.84) radiographs. AP was correctly identified with conventional methods when showed advanced status. CBCT was proved to be accurate to identify AP. (J Endod 2008; 34:273279)

Key Words
Apical periodontitis, cone beam computed tomography, diagnostic imaging, endodontic diagnosis, radiography

From the *Department of Oral Science, Federal University of Gois, Goinia, GO, Brazil; University of Cuiab, Cuiab, MT, Brazil; Federal University of Gois, Goinia, GO, Brazil; Department of Diagnostic Science, University of Texas, San Antonio, Texas; and Dental and Radiological Institute of Braslia, Braslia, DF, Brazil. Address requests for reprints to Professor Carlos Estrela, Centro de Ensino e Pesquisa Odontolgica do Brazil (CEPOBRAS), Rua C-245, Quadra 546, Lote 9, Jardim Amrica, CEP: 74.290200, Goinia, GO, Brazil. E-mail address: estrela3@terra. com.br. 0099-2399/$0 - see front matter Copyright 2008 by the American Association of Endodontists. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2007.11.023

he diagnosis of apical periodontitis (AP) represents an essential strategy to determine the selection of an effective therapeutic protocol for endodontic infection control. AP is a consequence of root canal system infection, which can involve progressive stages of inflammation and changes of periapical bone structure, resulting in resorption identified as radiolucencies in radiographs (1). Some studies have shown that a periapical lesion from endodontic infection might be present without being visible radiographically. The radiographic image corresponds to a 2-dimensional aspect of a 3-dimensional structure (25). Artificial lesions produced in cadavers can be detected by conventional radiography only if perforation, extensive destruction of the bone cortex on the outer surface, or erosion of the cortical bone from the inner surface is present. Lesions confined within the cancellous bone cannot be detected, whereas lesions with buccal and lingual cortical involvement produce distinct radiographic areas of rarefaction. To be visible radiographically, a periapical radiolucency should reach nearly 30%50% of bone mineral loss (2, 3). Other conditions, such as apical morphologic variations, surrounding bone density, x-ray angulations, and radiographic contrast, also influence radiographic interpretation (6). An experimentally induced lesion might or might not be detected, depending on its location. A periapical lesion of a certain size can be detected in a region covered by a thin cortex, whereas the same size lesion will not be seen in a region covered by a thicker cortex. Lesion location in different types of bone influences the radiographic visualization (7). A large number of studies with different diagnostic methods have evaluated the type and incidence of periapical lesions (8 11). Scientific consensus has been reached to the fact that AP is accurately identified by histologic analysis (10). On the other hand, it has been demonstrated that cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) can determine the difference in density between the cystic cavity content and the granulomatous tissue, favoring the choice for a noninvasive diagnosis (8, 11). Several advanced radiographic techniques for the detection of bone lesions have been used in dentistry, namely digital radiography, densitometry methods, CBCT, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, and nuclear techniques (7, 1215). CBCT has been successfully used in endodontics with different goals, including study of root canal anatomy, external and internal macromorphology in 3-dimensional reconstruction of the teeth, evaluation of root canal preparation, obturation, retreatment, coronal microleakage, detection of bone lesions, and experimental endodontology (7, 1218). Few studies have compared the differences in AP image interpretation by using CBCT, conventional periapical radiography, or digital radiography. CBCT has provided promising results with a more accurate detection of AP (14, 16 18). The therapeutic protocol to treat diseases of endodontic origin has routinely been based on the evaluation of pathologic and clinical characteristics frequently complemented by radiographic findings. Radiographic imaging is the most commonly used diagnostic resource in endodontic diagnosis and treatment, and image distortions constitute a serious inconvenience. In addition, it is important to emphasize the limited number of endodontic epidemiologic studies. The knowledge of prevalence and severity of AP is often based on periapical radiography, whose accuracy is questionable.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Accuracy of Imaging Methods for Detection of AP

273

Clinical Research
TABLE 1. Prevalence of AP in Endodontically Treated and Untreated Teeth, Identified by Panoramic, Periapical, and CBCT Images (n Panoramic
Treated teeth (n 1425) Presence of AP Absence of AP Nontreated teeth (n 83) Presence of AP Absence of AP
AP, apical periodontitis; CBCT, cone beam computed tomography. * 2 test.

1508)

Periapical
503 (35.3%) 922 (64.7%) 30 (36.1%) 53 (63.9%)

CBCT
902 (63.3%) 523 (36.7%) 62 (74.7%) 21 (25.3%)

P value*
.001 .001

251 (17.6%) 1174 (82.4%) 18 (21.7%) 65 (78.3%)

Therefore, considering some limitations on conventional radiography for detection of periapical bone lesions, advanced imaging methods such as CBCT might add benefits to endodontics and offer a higher quality on diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of CBCT imaging and panoramic and periapical radiographs on detection of AP.

Materials and Methods

Patients Imaging exam records of 888 consecutive patients (59% female; mean age, 50 12 years) including periapical and panoramic radiographs and CBCT were selected from databases from the Dental and Radiological Institute of Braslia (IORB, Braslia, DF, Brazil). Exams were obtained between May 2004 and August 2006. All patients had at least 1 tooth with history of secondary and primary endodontic infections, confirmed by clinical examination. A total of 1508 teeth were selected for the study, 523 molars, 597 premolars, 154 canines, and 234 incisors, and 94.5% of the sample had been treated endodontically. The study design was approved by the institutional Ethics in Research Committee. Imaging Methods and Analysis Panoramic radiographs were taken with a Veraviewepocs panoramic x-ray unit (J Morita Mfg Corp, Kyoto, Japan) with 0.5 mm 0.5 mm tube focal spot and with Kodak dental films (T-MAT, 15X30; Manaus, AM, Brazil). The periapical radiographs were taken with Max S-1 x-ray equipment (J Morita Mfg Corp) with 0.8 mm 0.8 mm tube focal spot and with Kodak Insight film (Eastman Kodak Co, Rochester, NY) according to the parallel radiographic technique. All films were processed in an automatic processor and developed by using standardized methods.

CBCT images were obtained with 3D Accuitomo XYZ Slice View Tomograph (model MCT-1; J Morita Mfg Corp) voxel size of 0.125 0.125 0.125 mm, 12 or 8 bits. Images were examined with specific software (3D tomo X version 1.0.51) in a PC workstation running under Microsoft Windows XP professional SP-1 (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, WA). Three calibrated examiners performed visual analysis of all digital images, and the periapical index (PAI) by rstavik et al. (19) was used to determine the periapical status as follows: 1, normal periapical structures; 2, small changes in bone structure; 3, changes in bone structure with some mineral loss; 4, periodontitis with well-defined radiolucent area; 5, severe periodontitis with exacerbating features.

Data Analysis Results of diagnostic radiographic methods were reported in frequency tables for the presence of AP, considering CBCT as the reference method. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of periapical and panoramic radiographs were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of periapical and panoramic images in detecting AP. The level of interobserver agreement was assessed by kappa statistics in 10% of the sample.

Results
The prevalence of AP in both endodontically treated and untreated teeth, as identified by periapical and panoramic radiographs and dental CBCT, is shown in Table 1. The high discrepancy between imaging methods to detect AP indicated the possibility of false-negative diagnosis when using conventional radiography. Table 2 summarizes the results of imaging diagnostic tests (periapical and panoramic) for the presence of periapical lesion diagnosed

TABLE 2. Results of Imaging Diagnostic Tests (periapical and panoramic) for the Presence of Periapical Lesion Diagnosed by CBCT as Standard Reference (n 1508) Teeth groups
All teeth Incisors Canines Premolars Molars

CBCT
Positive Negative Total Positive Negative Total Positive Negative Total Positive Negative Total Positive Negative Total

Periapical Positive
525 8 533 86 3 89 42 0 42 181 4 185 216 1 217

Panoramic Total
964 544 1508 160 74 234 81 73 154 333 264 597 390 133 523

Negative
439 536 975 74 71 145 39 73 112 152 260 412 174 132 306

Positive
268 1 269 26 1 27 21 0 21 86 0 86 133 0 133

Negative
696 543 1239 134 73 207 60 73 133 247 264 511 255 135 390

Total
964 544 1508 160 74 234 81 73 154 333 264 597 388 135 523

CBCT, cone beam computed tomography.

274

Estrela et al.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Clinical Research
TABLE 3. Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, and Diagnostic Accuracy (true positives Examined Teeth and Teeth Groups Method
Periapical

true negatives) for Periapical and Panoramic Exams, Considering All Specificity
0.98 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00

Group of teeth
All teeth Incisors Canines Premolar Molar All teeth Incisors Canines Premolar Molar

Sensitivity
0.55 0.54 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.28 0.16 0.26 0.26 0.34

PPV
0.98 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00

NPV
0.55 0.49 0.65 0.63 0.43 0.44 0.35 0.55 0.52 0.35

Accuracy
0.70 0.67 0.75 0.74 0.67 0.54 0.42 0.61 0.59 0.51

Panoramic

PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.

by CBCT as standard reference, considering all teeth together and each tooth group alone (incisors, canines, premolars, and molars). Data in Table 2 were used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy (true positives true negatives) for periapical and panoramic images (Table 3). Overall sensitivity was 0.55 and 0.28 for periapical and panoramic radiographs, respectively, which indicates that AP was correctly identified in 54.5% of the cases with periapical radiographs and in 27.8% of the cases with panoramic radiographs. Minor changes in sensitivity were found for the different tooth groups, except for incisors in panoramic radiographs (0.16). High specificity values were found for all tooth groups, ranging from 0.96 1.00. Predictive values showed high probability of a positive diagnosis, indicating that a tooth actually had AP (PPV range, 0.96 1.00). NPVs were significantly lower, ranging from 0.35 0.65. This means a rather low probability of a negative diagnosis, indicating an actual absence of periapical lesion, particularly in incisors and molars with panoramic radiographs (0.35 and 0.35, respectively). Overall accuracy was 0.70 and 0.54 for periapical and panoramic radiographs, respectively. Accuracy of periapical radiographs was significantly higher than that of panoramic radiographs (P .05), which means that periapical radiographs were shown to be more accurate than panoramic to correctly identify or exclude the presence of a periapical lesion. Table 4 shows the results of diagnostic tests with the PAI. A visual analysis of frequency distribution in Table 4 shows that CBCT tends to provide greater scores than periapical and panoramic radiographs, suggesting that diagnosis of AP graduation with conventional images is underrated in a great part of the cases. ROC curves and area under curve
TABLE 4. Results of Imaging Diagnostic Tests with the PAI (n 1
Periapical 1 2 3 4 5 Total Panoramic 1 2 3 4 5 Total 536 8 0 0 0 544 543 1 0 0 0 544

(AUC) for different cutoff points with periapical radiography (Fig. 1) show that high accuracy is obtained in the cutoff value of 5 for both periapical (AUC, 0.90) and panoramic (AUC, 0.84) radiographs. ROC analysis, therefore, suggests that AP is correctly identified with conventional methods when it is in an advanced stage. Kappa value for interobserver agreement considering the PAI scores ranged from 0.89 1.00 for periapical and panoramic radiographs and CBCT images.

Discussion
The findings of the present investigation demonstrated that the CBCT images present high accuracy for the detection of AP. CBCT images tend to offer greater scores than periapical and panoramic radiographs, suggesting that diagnosis of the graduation of AP with conventional images is frequently underestimated. AP was correctly identified in 54.5% of the cases with periapical radiographs (sensitivity, 0.55) and in 27.8% with panoramic radiographs (sensitivity, 0.28). Accuracy of periapical radiographs was significantly higher than that of panoramic radiographs (P .05). AP was correctly identified with conventional methods when a severe condition was present. The results of this study are in agreement with those of previous investigations (14, 17). Cotton et al. (14) reported that the ability of cone beam volumetric tomography to assess an area of interest in 3 dimensions might benefit both novice and experienced clinicians alike. The advantages include increased accuracy, higher resolution, scantime reduction, and lower radiation dose. Lofthag-Hansen et al. (17) compared intraoral periapical radiography with 3-dimensional images (3D Accuitomo) for the diagnosis of periapical pathology in 36 patients

1508) CBCT 2
248 119 1 0 0 368 338 30 0 0 0 368

3
93 81 12 1 0 187 133 51 3 0 0 187

4
96 149 92 46 0 383 219 95 51 18 0 383

5
2 3 8 11 2 26 6 4 6 9 1 26

Total

975 360 113 58 2 1508 1239 181 60 27 1 1508

PAI, periapical index; CBCT, cone beam computed tomography.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Accuracy of Imaging Methods for Detection of AP

275

Clinical Research

Figure 1. (A) ROC curves and AUC for different cutoff points with periapical radiographs. (B) ROC curves and AUC for different cutoff points with panoramic radiographs.

(46 teeth). When both diagnostic methods were analyzed by all observers, they agreed that the Accuitomo images provided clinically relevant additional information not found in the periapical films. Velvart et al. (16) correlated the information gathered from standard dental radiography and high resolution CBCT scans to the findings obtained during surgery regarding the presence of endodontic lesions in 50 patients. All 78 lesions diagnosed during surgery were also visible with CBCT scans. In contrast, only 61 (78.2%) lesions were noted by conventional radiographs. The mandibular canal was identified in 31 radiographs, whereas the oblique cuts of the corresponding CBCT scans clearly showed the mandibular canal in all patients. In addition, the amount of cortical and cancellous bone, bone thickness, and the 3-dimensional extension of the lesion could only be adequately interpreted in the CBCT scans. Rohlin et al. (20) evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of panoramic and periapical radiographs and verified that periapical radiography was significantly superior for detection of sclerotic lesions 276

and all lesions in maxillary premolars and mandibular molars. Stavropoulos and Wenzel (21) verified the accuracy of CBCT (New Tom 3G; NewTom Germany, Marburg, Germany) and intraoral digital and conventional film radiography in mechanically created periapical defects in pig jaws. The results showed that the New Tom 3G has a higher sensitivity, PPV, and diagnostic accuracy than intraoral radiography (digital Dixi2 or conventional radiography). No difference was observed between the 2 periapical (digital versus conventional) radiographic methods. von Stechow et al. (22) determined whether a 3-dimensional volumetric quantization of periradicular bone resorption could be achieved, and how this would correlate with 2-dimensional lesion area by histology. The results showed a significant correlation between lesion void volume and 2-dimensional lesion area by histology, as well as high correlations between void volume and void thickness and standard deviation of the void thickness, but no relationship with void surface. These results showed that 3-dimensional analysis of CBCT images is highly corre-

Estrela et al.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Clinical Research

Figure 1. (Continued).

lated with 2-dimensional cross-sectional measures of periradicular lesions. Nevertheless, CBCT allows assessment of additional microstructural features as well as subregional analysis of lesion development. The likelihood of AP to exist and not to be identifiable by periapical or panoramic radiographs is considerably high (Fig. 2). The difficulty to accurately detect AP has been mentioned elsewhere (2, 3, 7, 19). One important aspect to be considered is that it is necessary to have approximately 30%50% of mineral loss to visualize AP (2, 3). Morphologic variations of the apical region, bone density, x-ray angulations, radiographic contrast, and actual location of the periapical lesion will influence the radiographic interpretation (6, 23). The limitations of radiographic assessment as a study method should not be overlooked, mainly to reduce false-negative results. According to the criteria and conditions described in methodology, kappa values for PAI scores ranged from 0.89 1.00 for periapical and panoramic radiographs and CBCT images. However, previous investigations, analyzing the interobserver agreement, had shown lower values (24, 25), and in other studies, higher ones were verified (range,

0.80 0.95) (26, 27). These results compared with other studies, such as Molven et al. (23), and occurred possibly as a function of the number of diagnostic groups and the frequency of diagnoses. One of the scoring systems used in this investigation was the PAI described by rstavik et al. (19), which is the association of periapical lesion visualization on the basis of the radiographic aspects of the periodontal ligament. Its score system has been used in various research studies (27, 28). Epidemiologic studies (26 28) in different populations have shown values from 20%52% of AP prevalence in endodontically treated teeth identified by conventional periapical radiographs. These discrepancies were attributed to the following reasons: (1) lack of homogeneity of the populations that were compared; (2) lack of standardization on radiographic assessment methods; (3) use of teeth or individuals as referential; (4) quality of endodontic treatment rated by either general dentists or endodontists; and (5) different levels of endodontic practices (specialist, general clinician) and infection control in the different populations. 277

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Accuracy of Imaging Methods for Detection of AP

Clinical Research

Figure 2. (A) Panoramic and (B, C) periapical radiographs show normal periapical area of the upper right incisor. AP can be seen in the CBCT (D, E).

278

Estrela et al.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Clinical Research
In view of the limitations of periapical radiography to visualize AP, a review of epidemiologic studies should be undertaken considering the quality of periapical aspects offered by CBCT images. In addition, it will certainly reduce the influence on radiographic interpretation, with minor possibility of false-negative diagnosis. In the present study, AP prevalence in endodontically treated teeth, when comparing the panoramic and periapical radiographs and CBCT images, was 17.6%, 35.3%, and 63.3%, respectively (P .001). A considerable discrepancy can be observed among the imaging methods used to identify AP. Another aspect to be considered is that regardless of the method used to obtain the radiographic image, care should be taken to avoid misinterpretation. Regarding CBCT images, the presence of intracanal metallic post might lead to equivocated interpretations as a result of artifact formation. Lofthag-Hansen et al. (17) reported that when metallic objects are present in either the tooth of interest or an adjacent one, artifacts can pose difficulties in the analyses of Accuitomo images. In these cases, periapical radiographs are helpful to complement the diagnosis. The truth is that most dentists do not have CBCT equipment in their dental offices. Thus, during endodontic treatment, it is important to choose a radiographic technique that minimizes image distortions, such as cone parallel technique, to obtain a high level of reproducibility and increase the diagnostic accuracy of the imaging method. The viability and cost-effectiveness of CBCT images in clinical routine should be weighed, considering the caution with radiation doses, because it is not in accordance with the standard dose recommended in some countries. It is important to remember that this study was done on the basis of databases from a radiologic institute. A positive factor to use the CBCT is production of high-resolution images. The CBCT images provide clinicians with submillimeter spatial resolution images of high diagnostic quality with relatively short scanning times (10 70 seconds) and a radiation dose equivalent to that needed for 4 15 panoramic radiographs (29). However, image quality might vary according to CBCT source. The characteristics of the CBCT equipment used in this study (3D Accuitomo) were the following: floor space, 1.6 mm 1.2 mm; sensor type II; voxel size, 0.125 mm; field of view, 4 3 cm; scan time, 17 seconds; no pulsed x-ray. The use of conventional radiographic images for detection of AP should be done with care because of the high possibility of false-negative diagnosis. A great advantage of using CBCT in endodontics refers to its usefulness in aiding in the identification of periapical lesions and in a differential diagnosis with a noninvasive technique with high accuracy. Under the tested conditions and within the limitations of this investigation, it might be concluded that the prevalence of AP was significantly higher with CBCT, in comparison to periapical and panoramic radiographs. AP was correctly identified in 54.5% of the cases with periapical radiographs and in 27.8% of the cases with panoramic radiographs. Minor changes in sensitivity were found for the different tooth groups, except for incisors in panoramic radiographs. ROC analysis suggests that AP is correctly identified with conventional methods when in an advanced stage. CBCT was proved an accurate diagnostic method to identify AP.
2. Bender IB, Seltzer S. Roentgenographic and direct observation of experimental lesions in bone I. J Am Dent Ass 1961;62:152 60. 3. Bender IB, Seltzer S. Roentgenographic and direct observation of experimental lesions in bone II. J Am Dent Ass 1961;62:708 16. 4. Van der Stelt PF. Experimentally produced bone lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1985;59:306 12. 5. White SC, Atchison KA, Hewlett ER, Flack VF. Efficacy of FDA guidelines for prescribing radiographs to detect dental and intraosseous conditions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:108 14. 6. Halse A, Molven O, Fristad I. Diagnosing periapical lesions: disagreement and borderline cases. Int Endod J 2002;35:7039. 7. Huumonen S, rstavik D. Radiological aspects of apical periodontitis. Endodontic Topics 2002;1:325. 8. Trope M, Pettigrew J, Petras J, Barnett F, Tronstad L. Differentiation of radicular cyst and granulomas using computerized tomography. Endod Dent Traumatol 1989;5:69 72. 9. Nair PNR, Pajarola G, Schroeder HE. Types and incidence of human periapical lesions obtained with extracted teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996;81:93102. 10. Laux M, Abbott PV, Pajarola G, Nair PNR. Apical inflammatory root resorption: a correlative radiographic and histological assessment. Int Endod J 2000;33:48393. 11. Simon JHS, Enciso R, Malfaz JM, Rogers R, Bailey-Perry M, Patel A. Differential diagnosis of large periapical lesions using cone beam computed tomography measurements and biopsy. J Endod 2006;32:8337. 12. Cotti E, Campisi G. Advanced radiographic techniques for the detection of lesions in bone. Endodontic Topics 2004;7:5272. 13. Nielsen RB, Alyassin AM, Peters DD, Carnes DL, Lancaster J. Microcomputed tomography: an advanced system for detailed endodontic research. J Endod 1995; 21:561 8. 14. Cotton TP, Geisler TM, Holden DT, Schwartz SA, Schindler WG. Endodontic applications of cone-beam volumetric tomography. J Endod 2007;33:112132. 15. Nair MK, Nair UP. Digital and advanced imaging in endodontics: a review. J Endod 2007;33:1 6. 16. Velvart P, Hecker H, Tillinger G. Detection of the apical lesion and the mandibular canal in conventional radiography and computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001;92:682 8. 17. Lofthag-Hansen S, Hummonen S, Grndahl K, Grndahl H-G. Limited cone-beam CT and intraoral radiography for the diagnosis of periapical pathology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103:114 9. 18. Nakata K, Naitoh M, Izumi M, Inamoto K, Ariji E, Nakamura H. Effectiveness of dental computed tomography in diagnostic imaging of periradicular lesion of each root of a multirooted tooth: a case report. J Endod 2006;32:5837. 19. rstavik D, Kerekes K, Eriksen HM. The periapical index: a scoring system for radiographic assessment of apical periodontitis. Endod Dent Traumatol 1986;2:20 4. 20. Rohlin M, Kullendorff B, Ahlquist M, Henrikson CO, Hollender L, Stenstrom B. Comparison between panoramic and periapical radiography in the diagnosis of periapical bone lesions. Dentomax Radiol 1989;18:1515. 21. Stavropoulos A, Wenzel A. Accuracy of cone-beam dental CT, intraoral digital and conventional film radiography for the detection of periapical lesions: an ex-vivo study in pig jaws. Clin Oral Invest 2007;11:101 6. 22. von Stechow D, Balto K, Stashenko P, Mller R. Three-dimensional quantitation of periradicular bone destruction by micro-computed tomography. J Endod 2003; 29:252 6. 23. Molven O, Halse A, Fristad I. Long-term reliability and observer comparisons in the radiographic diagnosis of periapical disease. Int Endod J 2002;35:1427. 24. Rohlin M, Kullendorff B, Ahlqwist M, Stenstrom B. Observer performance in the assessment of periapical pathology: a comparison of panoramic with periapical radiography. DentoMax Facial Radiol 1991;20:12731. 25. Saunders MB, Gulabivala K, Holt R, Kahan RS. Reliability of radiographic observation recorded on a proforma measured using inter- and intraobserver variation: a preliminary study. Int Endod J 2000;33:272 8. 26. Weiger R, Hitzler S, Hermle G, Lst C. Periapical status, quality of root canal fillings and estimated endodontic treatment needs in an urban German population. Endod Dent Traumatol 1997;13:69 74. 27. Kirkevang L-L, rstavik D, Hrsted-Bindslev P, Wenzel A. Periapical status and quality of root fillings and coronal restorations in a Danish population. Int Endod J 2000;33:509 15. 28. Eriksen HM, Kirkevang L-L, Petersson K. Endodontic epidemiology and treatment outcome: general considerations. Endodontic Topics 2002;2:19. 29. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomograghy in dental practice. J Can Dent Ass 2007;72:75 80.

References
1. Nair PNR, Sjgren U, Figdor D, Sundqvist G. Persistent periapical radiolucencies of root-filled human teeth, failed endodontic treatments, and periapical scars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999;87:61727.

JOE Volume 34, Number 3, March 2008

Accuracy of Imaging Methods for Detection of AP

279