English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective: To assess the prevalence of incidental findings in relation to the side of a patient’s face, location, and age group on cone beam computed tomography.  Material and Methods: 175 CBCT examinations were performed on patients aged between 12 and 77 years, consisting of recordings of the anatomical location and findings following each examination. For standardization of tomographic evaluations, acquired images were analyzed by two previously trained expert radiologists. After positional adjustment of the multi-dimensional images on the monitor screen, examination of each scan was conducted simultaneously on the coronal, axial, and sagittal planes. Fisher’s exact tests and Chi-square tests were used to compare the frequencies of incidental findings using a significance level of 0.05.  Results: The most frequent incidental finding was maxillary sinus mucosal thickening, which occurred on the right and left side in 46.3% and 46.9% of the patients, respectively. The second most frequent incidental finding was flattening of the mandibular condyle, occurring on the right and left side in 29.7% and 24% of the patients, respectively. No significant difference was observed among the individual age groups. The number of incidental findings per patient varied from 0 to 5 on the right side and left side and from 0 to 12 in total. The Kendall correlation coefficient for the number of incidental findings between the sides was 0.25 (p<0.0001), indicating a weak but significant and positive association between the sides in relation to the number of incidental findings. The mean total number of incidental findings was 4.07.  Conclusion: The prevalence of the individual incidental findings and the total number of findings were not statistically different. However, some alterations were more likely to be observed bilaterally.

Evaluation of Incidental Findings on Cone Beam Computed Tomography