Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of digital image displays performance in the detection of artificial internal root resorptions lesions.
da Hora, Matheus Nogueira; Rosado, Lucas de Paula Lopes; Neves, Frederico Sampaio; Crusoé-Rebello, Ieda; Vasconcelos, Taruska Ventorini.
Afiliação
  • da Hora MN; Department of Propedeutics and Integrated Clinic, Division of Oral Radiology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
  • Rosado LPL; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
  • Neves FS; Department of Propedeutics and Integrated Clinic, Division of Oral Radiology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
  • Crusoé-Rebello I; Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
  • Vasconcelos TV; Department of Propedeutics and Integrated Clinic, Division of Oral Radiology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol ; 50(7): 20200578, 2021 Oct 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33835867
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic efficacy of different devices for visualizing digital images in detecting simulated internal root resorption (IRR). METHODS: 26 uniradicular human teeth were sectioned along its long axis and randomly divided into two groups. Then, they were submerged in hydrochloric acid (HCl) P.A 37% at different times to make two types of defects: Type 1 (2 hours), and type 2 (3 hours). Digital periapical radiographs were acquired in three moments: before section, after section and after immersion in acid. The images were evaluated on three different devices: 27-inch iMac Desktop, 8-inch Android Tablet, and 5.5-inch iPhone 8 Plus using a 5-point scale. RESULTS: The sensitivity and accuracy values were higher with the use of the Android Tablet, for both types of defects. For the values of the area under ROC curve, higher results were observed with the Android Tablet and lower results with the iMac, showing a significant difference (p < 0.05) when comparing the use of the iMac with the Android Tablet and iPhone 8, for type 1 defects. When comparing the different devices, in the evaluation of images of type 2 defects, the values showed no statistical difference, regardless of the device evaluated (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The size of the lesion interferes with the detection capacity in the image. However, the use of portable devices does not impair the diagnosis of IRR, regardless of size and the dental practioners may use different devices/display, under optimal viewing conditions, to detect IRR lesions, without jeopardizing the diagnostic ability.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Reabsorção da Raiz Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Reino Unido
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Reabsorção da Raiz Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Reino Unido