Premium
Comparaisons entre les radiographies panoramiques et intra‐buccales pour la détermination des niveaux osseux alvéolaires dans une population de maintenance parodontale
Author(s) -
Persson Rigmor E.,
Tzannetou Sappho,
Feloutzis Andreas G.,
Brägger Urs,
Persson G. Rutger,
Lang Niklaus P.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2003.00379.x
Subject(s) - medicine , dental alveolus , dentistry , radiography , orthodontics , molar , population , surgery , environmental health
Background: Information about the agreement between intra‐oral (I‐O) and panoramic (OPG) radiographs is limited. Aims: (1) To assess the agreement between I‐Os and OPGs for direct measurements of the distance between the cemento‐enamel junction (CEJ) and the alveolar bone level (BL) as well as the proportional values in relation to the root length (CEJ–BL/root length), and (2) to explore the symmetry between the left‐ and right‐side measurements. Material and Methods: I‐Os and OPGs were studied in 292 periodontal maintenance subjects (mean age 55.5 years, SD±12.6) with on average 22.4 teeth (SD±4.1 range: 6–28). The images were measured using a PC software program. Site‐based I‐O and OPG values for CEJ–BL as well as CEJ–BL/root length were compared. OPG values of CEJ–BL/root length values between the left and right sides were also studied. Results: A total of 11,395 linear distances (CEJ–BL plus CEJ–apex) from the I‐Os and 21,462 linear distances from the OPGs were measured. The intra‐class correlation coefficients (ICCs) between sets of readings of CEJ–BL varied between 0.80 and 0.89 ( p <0.001), with the best agreement for tooth 22 (ICC: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.83–0.92). The ICCs for CEJ–BL/root length varied between 0.54 and 0.92. Mean differences between I‐O and OPG values were in the 0.00–0.04 mm range for the CEJ–BL/root length comparisons. The maxillary anterior sextant demonstrated a 1.4 × enlargement by OPG for the CEJ–BL/root length comparisons. No distortions were observed for mandibular sextants. Left‐ and right‐side symmetry of periodontal bone loss was demonstrated. ICC varied between 0.79 (95.00% CI: 0.71–0.84, p <0.01) and 0.53 (95.00% CI: 0.36–0.65, p < 0.01). Conclusions: I‐O and OPG radiograph readings are in great agreement. Alveolar bone loss appeared to have a symmetrical distribution pattern. Hence for periodontal assessments, OPG radiographic readings may, at least in part, substitute for full‐mouth periapical radiographic evaluation.