Guerra PJA, Trujillo SZC, Coste RJ, Carmona CJA, Fra SI

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 654-663
PDF size: 370.27 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: periapical radiography constitutes the classic and more used method in Dentistry, which can be carried out with bisectal direction or by parallelism, reaching this last one, a generalization and marked efficacy due to the development of system positioners and a coating approach.
Objective: to determine the effectiveness of periapical radiographic methods by bisection and parallelism at Antonio Briones Montoto Dentistry Teaching Clinic.
Methods: a cross-sectional descriptive study was carried out between December 2017 and April 2018 in the Radiology Department of the chosen dentistry clinic in a sample of 80 patients, who were given a periapical radiography by bisection and another by parallelism of the region of bicuspids and/or upper molars by trained students of the fourth academic-year of dentistry studies and comparing the images obtained.
Results: partial images were produced in 12,5 % and 4 % with bisection and parallelism respectively. The most frequent distortions were the overlapping of the maxillary sinus and zygomatic floor to the roots in 45 and 26,5 % with bisectal direction, 10 and 5 % with parallelism; while the need to repeat X-rays was 25 and 6,25 % respectively.
Conclusions: by the periapical and parallelism methods using XCP systems, all the images produced presented a total approach, with scarce and slight distortions of the images saving resources because the need to repeat X-rays was minimal, in addition, it was very easy to learn and perform by novel personnel.

REFERENCES

1. Tsolakis A, Kalavritinos M, Bitsanis E, Sanoudos M, Benetou V, Alexiou K, et al. Zeliabilityof different radiographic methods for the localization of displaced maxillary canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. [Internet] 2018 Feb [citado: 12/06/2019]; 153(2): [aprox 12p.]. Available from:https://www.ajodo.org/article/S0889-5406(17)30857-0/abstract

2. Nascimento EH, Gaêta H, Andrade MF, Freitas DQ. Prevalence of technical errors and periapical lesions in a sample of endodontically treated teeth: a CBCT analysis. Clin Oral Investig. [Internet] 2018 Sep [citado: 12/06/2019]; 22(7): [aprox 8p.]. Disponible en: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00784-018-2344-y

3. Yilmaz E, Kayikcioglu T, Kayipmaz S. Computer-aided diagnosis of periapical cyst and keratocystic odontogenic tumor on cone beam computed tomography. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. [Internet] 2017 Jul [citado: 26/05/2018]; 146(s/n): [aprox 9p.]. Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169260716304291

4. Vidor M, Salatino G, Pante M, Diasda HL, Assein N, Lemos A, et al. Is cone beam computed tomography accurate for postoperative evaluation of implants? An in vitro study. Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. [Internet] 2017 Jul [citado: 26/05/2018]; 124(5): [aprox 10p.]. Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212440317310118

5. Eskandarloo A, Saati S, Ardakani MP, Jamalpour M, Gholi Mezerji NM, Akheshteh V. Diagnostic Accuracy of Three Cone Beam Computed Tomography Systems and Periapical Radiography for Detection of Fenestration Around Dental Implants. Contemp Clin Dent. [Internet] 2018 Jul-Sep [citado: 12/06/2019]; 9(3): [aprox 5p.]. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6104358/

6. Felix RP, Shinkai RS, Rockenbach MI. The influence of dental implants in periapical and panoramic radiographs and cone beam computed tomography images: a clinical study. Gen Dent. [Internet] 2018 Abr [citado: 12/06/2019]; 66(2): [aprox 5p.]. Disponible en: https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/29513241

7. Mauriello SM, Tang Q, Johnson KB, Hadgraft HH, Platin E. A Comparison of Technique Errors using Two Radiographic Intra-oral Receptor-holding Devices. J Dent Hyg. [Internet] 2015 Dic [citado: 12/06/2019]; 89(6): [aprox 10 p.]. Disponible en: http://jdh.adha.org/content/89/6/384.short

8. Gurel MA, Helvacioglu Kivanc B, Ekici A. A comparative assessment of the accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, iPex and iPexII electronic apex locators: An in vitro study. JIstanbUnivFac Dent. [Internet] 2017 Ene [citado: 12/06/2019]; 51(1): [aprox 10 p.]. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5573492/

9. Piasecki L, Everdan DD, Silva UX, Portela V, Brandao CG, Gamabarini G, et al. The Use of Micro-Computed Tomography to Determine the Accuracy of 2 Electronic Apex Locators and Anatomic Variations Affecting Their Precision. Journal of Endod. [Internet] 2016 Ago [citado: 12/06/2019]; 42(8): [aprox 8p.]. Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099239916302199

10. Simancas Pallares M, Arévalo Tovar L, Díaz Caballero A. Concordancia interexaminador de hallazgos periodontales utilizando radiografía periapical convencional. RevUniInd Santander Salud. [Internet] 2016 [citado: 12/01/2019]; 48(1): [aprox. 5p.]. Disponible en: https://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistasaluduis/article/view/5413

11. Mattaldi Gómez RA. Radiología Odontológica. 2 ed. La Habana: Editorial Pueblo y Educación; 1977. P.75-95.

12. White S, Pharoah H. Oral Radiology. Principles and Interpretation. 4.ed. México: Mosby; 1994. p. 139 – 150.

13. Rao MS, Choksi SK. Comparison of two film holders for periapical radiography performed by dental students. MSDA J [Internet]. 1996. [citado: 12/06/2019]; 39(1): [aprox 12p.]. Available from:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9569872

14. Kazzi D, Horner K, Qualtrough AC, Martinez Y, Rushton VE. A comparative study of three periapical radiographic techniques for endodontic working length estimation. Int Endod J. [Internet] 2007 Jul [citado: 12/06/2019]; 40(7): [aprox 10 p.]. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17459119