Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Endodontics.

Full author names:

William C. Scarfe, BDS, MS, FRACDS1

Martin D. Levin, DMD2

David Gane, BSC (hons), DDS3

Allan G. Farman, BDS, PhD, MBA, DSc1

Full institutional mailing addresses:

1
Professor, Radiology and Imaging Science, Department of Surgical and Hospital

Dentistry, The University of Louisville School of Dentistry, 501 South Preston

Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40292, USA

2
Adjunct Associate Professor of Endodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University

of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

3
Vice President, Kodak Dental Imaging/Practiceworks Atlanta, Georgia

Corresponding author e-mail address:

[email protected]

Page 1 of 47
Abstract (150 words)

Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) is a diagnostic imaging modality

that provides high quality, accurate three dimensional (3D) representations of the

osseous elements of the maxillofacial skeleton. CBCT systems are available that

provide small field of view images at low dose with sufficient spatial resolution for

applications in endodontic diagnosis, treatment guidance and post treatment

evaluation. This article provides a literature review and pictorial demonstration of

CBCT as an imaging adjunct for endodontics.

Introduction

Since Kells first reported the usefulness of visualizing a lead wire in a root

canal on a “radiogram” in establishing the length of a root canal in 1899 [1, 2],

radiography has been a pivotal tool in the practice of endodontics. Almost a century

later, building on the pioneering efforts of those using conventional computed

tomography (CT) and micro CT, the introduction of maxillofacial CBCT in 1996

provided the first clinically practical technology demonstrating application of 3D

imaging for endodontic considerations [3].

Role of Imaging in Endodontics

Radiography is essential to successful diagnosis of odontogenic and non-

odontogenic pathoses, treatment of the pulp chamber and canals of the root of a

compromised tooth via intra-coronal access, biomechanical instrumentation, final

Page 2 of 47
canal obturation and assessment of healing. Imaging serves at all stages in

endodontics [4]:

1) Pre-operative Assessment. Imaging achieves visualization of dental

and alveolar hard tissue morphology and pathologic alterations to assist

correct diagnosis. It provides information on the morphology of the tooth

including location and number of canals, pulp chamber size and degree of

calcification, root structure, direction and curvature, fractures, iatrogenic

defects and the extent of dental caries. The effects of periradicular and

periapical disease can be determined, including the degree of root

resorption and characteristics of periapical osteolysis. Larger lesions, only

determined by imaging, may necessitate adjunctive surgical procedures in

addition to conventional intra-canal therapy. Diagnostic radiographs help

predict the potential for complications, permit root fracture detection and

demonstrate periapical lesions.

2) Intra-operative. During therapy two intraoral periapical images may be

performed. The first is a “working” radiograph achieved by placement of a

metallic file(s) into the root canal(s) to a length that approximates that of

the root as radiological and anatomic root apex are almost never

coincident. This ensures that mechanical debridement of the intra-canal

contents extends to the apical terminus of the canal and that obturation is

dense, homogeneous and contained within the root canal system. In

addition, prior to final obturation, a “final” or pre-condensation radiograph

is made to assure proper fitting of the master cone.

Page 3 of 47
 3) Post-operative. A “post operative” radiograph immediately after root

canal obturation is made to assess the sealing condensation and

containment of the root canal filling material within the root canal system.

In cases where periradicular healing is incomplete, it acts as a baseline for

assessment of healing in the medium and potentially long term. Imaging

is important in evaluating the results of previous therapy, delayed

healing, evaluating potential obstacles to retreatment as well as surgical

considerations [5].

Limitations of Conventional 2D Imaging

Intraoral radiography is based on the transmission, attenuation and

recording of x-rays on an analog film or digital receptor, and requires optimized

geometric configuration of the x-ray generator, tooth and sensor to provide an

accurate projection of the tooth. The image produced is a two-dimensional (2D)

representation of a three-dimensional (3D) object. If any component of the imaging

chain process is compromised, the resulting image may demonstrate exposure or

geometric errors [6] and be sub-optimal. 3D characteristics such as complex dental

anatomy and surrounding structures can make interpretation of 2D “shadows”

difficult and can contribute to non-healing of endodontic cases.

Success in endodontics is assessed in healing of the periapical bone adjacent

to obturated canals. Goldman, et al. [7] showed that in evaluating healing of

periapical lesions using 2D periapical radiographs there was only 47% agreement

between six examiners. Goldman, et al. [8] also reported that when those same

Page 4 of 47
examiners evaluated the same films at two different times, they only had 19-80%

agreement between the two evaluations.

Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

In fields of dentistry where 3D imaging is necessary, CBCT is considered by

some to be the standard of care [9-14]. CBCT is accomplished by using a rotating

gantry to which an x-ray source and detector are fixed. A divergent pyramidal- or

cone-shaped source of ionizing radiation is directed through the middle of the area

of interest onto an area x-ray detector on the opposite side of the patient. The x-

ray source and detector rotate around a fixed fulcrum within the region of interest

(ROI). During the exposure sequence hundreds of planar projection images are

acquired of the field of view (FOV) in an arc of at least 1800. In this single rotation,

CBCT provides precise, essentially immediate and accurate 3D radiographic images.

As CBCT exposure incorporates the entire FOV, only one rotational sequence of the

gantry is necessary to acquire enough data for image reconstruction. CBCT is a

complementary modality for specific applications rather than a replacement for 2D

imaging modalities [9-13].

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first CBCT unit for

dental use in the United States on March 8, 2001 - the NewTom DVT 9000

(Quantitative Radiology srl, Verona, Italy). FDA approval for three more CBCT units

quickly followed in 2003 followed for the 3D Accuitomo, (J. Morita Mfg. Corp.,

Kyoto, Japan) on March 6, the i-CAT (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA)

on October 2, and the CB MercuRay (Hitachi, Medical Corp., Kashiwa-shi, Chiba-

Page 5 of 47
ken, Japan) on October 20. Since 2003, a number of other CBCT units have been

FDA approved in the United States, including the Kodak 9000 3D,

(Carestream/Trophy, Marne-la-Vallée, France), which is currently the highest

resolution unit (Table 1). Several additional units are in various stages of

development, testing or application for FDA approval.

Types of CBCT Equipment

CBCT systems can be categorized according to the orientation of the patient

during image acquisition, the scan volume irradiated, or the clinical functionality.

Patient Positioning. Depending on the system employed, maxillofacial

CBCT can be performed with the patient in three possible positions: 1) sitting; 2)

standing; and 3) supine. Equipment that requires the patient to be supine has a

larger physical footprint and may not be readily accessible for patients with physical

disabilities. Standing units may not be able to be adjusted to a height to

accommodate wheelchair bound patients. Seated units are the most comfortable;

however fixed seats may not allow ready scanning of physically disabled or

wheelchair bound patients. As scan times are often similar to or greater than those

used with panoramic imaging, perhaps more important than patient orientation is

the head restraint mechanism used.

Scan Volume. The dimensions of the FOV, or scan volume, are primarily

dependent on the detector size and shape, beam projection geometry and the

ability to collimate the beam. The shape of the FOV can be either a cylinder or

Page 6 of 47
spherical (e.g. NewTom 3G). Collimation of the primary x-ray beam limits x-

radiation exposure to the region of interest (ROI). Field size limitation therefore

ensures that an optimal FOV can be selected for each patient based on disease

presentation and the region designated to be imaged. Based on available or

selected scan volume height, the use of units can be designed as:

1) localized region (also referred to as focused, small field or limited field)

- approx. 5cm or less

2) single arch - 5cm to 7cm

3) inter-arch – 7cm to 10cm

4) maxillofacial – 10cm to 15cm

5) craniofacial – greater than 15cm

In general, the smaller the scan volume, the higher the spatial resolution of

the image. As the earliest sign of periapical pathology is discontinuity in the lamina

dura and widening of the periodontal ligament space, it is desirable that the optimal

resolution of the any CBCT imaging system used in endodontics not exceed 200μm

– the average width of the periodontal ligament space. The 3D Accuitomo (J.

Morita, Corporation, Kyoto, Japan) - the first of the small FOV systems – provided a

resolution of 0.125mm. At the time of publication, nominal voxel resolution varies

from 0.4mm to 0.076mm.

Multi-modality. Hybrid multi-modal systems combine digital panoramic

radiography with a relatively small-to medium-FOV CBCT system. This combination

is now priced at a level similar to upper-level digital panoramic radiographic

systems of the relatively recent past. Cost savings come from the fact that the cost

Page 7 of 47
of CBCT detectors is highly dependent on size. The ProMax 3D CBVT (Planmeca Oy,

Helsinki, Finland) was the first to incorporate a small FOV 3D sensor to their ProMax

digital panoramic line, which can be also be retro-fitted to any of the prior ProMax

digital models. Examples of other hybrid units are the Veraviewepocs 3D (J. Morita,

Corporation, Kyoto, Japan), the Picasso Trio (Vatech/E. Woo Corporation, Korea)

and the Kodak Dental Imaging 9000 DS (Kodak Dental Imaging/Practiceworks

Atlanta, GA, USA) (Fig. 1).

There are advantages beyond reduced capital costs to small FOV CBCT units

for endodontic applications. First, a small FOV means that high resolution images

with a spatial resolution down to 0.076 mm isotropic voxel size can be achieved at

very low exposure to ionizing radiation and without extensive reconstruction times

that would be expected with larger FOV systems due to the greater file sizes to be

processed. Second, a restricted FOV reduces the volume examined, and for which

the practitioner is responsible to interpret. Small FOV systems concentrate on the

dental arches or individual temporomandibular joints, the structures in which the

average dentist is most familiar. There is less detail of the cranial cavity, paranasal

sinuses, ear and neck - structures less familiar to the average dentist. A small FOV

CBCT system is undoubtedly too restrictive for maxillofacial surgeons who conduct

craniofacial and orthognathic surgery or for complex implant/prosthetic situations

where the jaws and both temporomandibular joints are best evaluated in toto

rather than as individual components; however, third-party software is now

available to “stitch” together adjacent small FOV images [15].

Page 8 of 47
Radiation Dose Considerations

For a meaningful comparison of radiation risk, radiation exposures are

converted to effective dose (E), measured in Sieverts (Sv). The Sv is a large unit so

in maxillofacial imaging milli-[10-3; mSv] or micro-[10-6; µSv] Sieverts are

reported. The radiation dose to specific tissues is measured, adjusted for the

amount of that tissue in the field of view, and weighted based on radiation

sensitivity of the tissue. The weighted tissue/organ doses are then summed to

assess Effective Dose (E). Comparisons can be performed with respect to natural

background radiation.

The tissues/organs used to calculate the effective dose are specified by the

International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The organs used to

calculate effective dose for imaging of the head include the bone marrow, thyroid,

esophagus, skin, bone surface, salivary glands, brain, and “remainder” tissues. [16]

Published effective doses for digital panoramic radiographs range from 5.5 to 22.0

µSv [17], while digital cephalometric radiographs have effective doses of 2.2 to 3.4

µSv [18]. This compares with an average annual effective dose from background

radiation in the United States of about 3,000 µSv (3.0 mSv).

There are a number of factors that will affect the radiation dose produced by

a CBCT system: the imaging parameters used (kVp, mAs); pulsed beam versus

continuous beam; amount, type, and shape of the beam filtration; the number of

basis images dependent partly on use of 360° or lesser rotations; and limitations on

the size of the field of view. Factors such as beam quality and filtration are unique

Page 9 of 47
to a specific machine, while other factors, such as FOV, can sometimes be operator

controlled. Typically, the smaller the field of view for a given system, the lower the

radiation dose applied [19, 20]. Since the effective dose is computed from a

weighted summation of doses to various organs, removing some organs from the

path of the x-ray beam can reduce the effective dose. Since the radiation received

by the thyroid gland contributes a large amount to the effective dose, limiting the

beam to the maxilla instead of the whole head produces a lower effective dose.

Tables 2 and 3 provide the most recent published radiation exposures for

selected CBCT units using ICRP (2007) recommendations [19-30] and compares

them as multiples of digital panoramic examinations (using an average digital

panoramic exposure of 14 µSv obtained from the published range of effective dose)

and equivalent days of per capita background dose (based on an annual full body

background exposure of 3 mSv). At the time of publication, the CBCT unit with the

highest resolution and the smallest field of view (the KODAK 9000 3D) involves

patient radiation exposure varying from as little as 0.4 to 2.7 digital panoramic

equivalents depending on the part of the mouth studied [30].

Advantages of CBCT in Endodontics

Perhaps the most important advantage of CBCT in endodontics is that it

demonstrates anatomic features in 3D that intraoral, panoramic and cephalometric

images cannot. CBCT units reconstruct the projection data to provide inter-

relational images in three orthogonal planes (axial, sagittal and coronal). In

Page 10 of 47
addition because reconstruction of CBCT data is performed natively using a

personal computer, data can be reoriented in their true spatial relationships.

Due to the isotropic nature of the constructed volume elements (“voxels”)

constituting the volumetric dataset, image data can be sectioned non-orthogonally.

Most software provide for various non-axial 2D images in multi-planar reformation

(MPR). Such MPR modes include oblique, curved planar reformation (providing

“simulated” distortion free panoramic images) and, serial trans-planar reformation

(providing cross-sections), which can be used to highlight specific anatomic regions

for diverse diagnostic tasks (Fig. 2). Enhancements including zoom magnification,

window/level adjustments and text or arrow annotation can be applied. Cursor-

driven measurement algorithms provide the clinician with an interactive capability

for real-time dimensional assessment. On-screen measurements are free from

distortion and magnification.

Because acquisition occurs innately as high resolution three dimensional

volumetric data and can be displayed as interactive images, CBCT technology

provides the clinician with an unparalleled visualization of the often complex

relationships and boundaries between teeth and their associated pathology and

anatomic features within the alveolus and jaws such as the maxillary sinus and

mandibular canal and foramen.

Page 11 of 47
Limitations of CBCT in Endodontics

Despite the provision of the third dimension, the spatial resolution of CBCT images (0.4

mm to 0.076 mm or equivalent to 1.25 to 6.5 line pairs per mm-1[lp.mm-1]) are inferior to

conventional film-based (approx. 20 lp.mm-1), or digital (ranging from 8-20 lp.mm-1)

intraoral radiography [31]. However, the ability of this technology to demonstrate

geometrically accurate images in all three dimensions and the elimination of anatomic

noise facilitates the assessment of a number of features important in endodontic

diagnosis, treatment and long term management. The optimal resolution for CBCT images

in endodontics is invariably task specific – however; most aspects of endodontics involve

imaging of small structures. Liedke, et al. [32] has recommended a minimal voxel

resolution of 0.3 mm for the detection of external root resorption. Ex vivo research

performed at our institution [33] has determined the effect of isotropic voxel dimensions

on observer detection of the presence or absence of secondary canals in the mesio-buccal

root of the maxillary first permanent molar. Observer inter-rater reliability and detection

of mesio-buccal canals increased substantially with increasing resolution with more than

93% accuracy with a voxel resolution of 0.12 mm but accuracy barely over 60% with 0.4

mm resolution. The diagnosis of other subtle conditions (e.g. initial stages of apical

periodontitis) involving the periodontal ligament space, which has an average dimension

of 0.2 mm, also demand high resolution.

The CBCT projection geometry results in the whole volume within the FOV

being irradiated with every basis image projection. Scattered radiation is produced

omni-directionally and is recorded by pixels on the cone beam CT detector but does

not reflect actual attenuation of the object within a specific path of the x-ray beam.

Additional recorded x-ray nonlinear attenuation is noise. This can be eliminated

Page 12 of 47
somewhat by algorithms such as wavelet transformation of filtered back-projection

data; however, because of the use of an area detector, some of this nonlinear

attenuation is recorded and contributes to image degradation when not adequately

attended to by noise reduction algorithms. Remaining noise contributes to the

graininess of the image which can be more pronounced in images in systems using

a large FOV, especially where low signal due to restricted radiation exposure is the

case.

Maxillofacial CBCT images presently lack the ability to record subtle changes

in attenuation across a wide range of tissue radio-densities. In endodontics,

contrast resolution might well be of importance in distinguishing the nature of

periapical or sinus soft tissue contents. Three factors, inherent in the CBCT

acquisition process presently limit contrast resolution: 1) scattered radiation

contributing to the potential for increased noise; 2) CBCT systems pronounced

“heel effect” due to the divergence of the x-ray beam over the area detector

producing non-uniformity of the incident x-ray beam; and 3) detector imperfections

affecting linearity in response to x-radiation. These factors, and a desire to restrict

dose, contribute to restricting the application of current maxillofacial CBCT imaging

to the assessment of osseous structures. Work continues to develop systems

capable of a wide contrast range supporting both hard tissue and soft tissue

applications while still limiting dose.

CBCT images, like those from other diagnostic modalities, are susceptible to

artifacts that affect image fidelity. Artifacts can be attributed to four sources [34]:

1) the patient; 2) the scanner; 3) artifacts specific to the CBCT system used

Page 13 of 47
including partial volume averaging, under-sampling and the cone beam effect; and,

4) X-ray beam artifacts arising from the inherent polychromatic nature of the

projection x-ray beam that results in what is known as beam hardening (i.e. mean

energy increases because lower energy photons are absorbed in preference to

higher energy photons). Beam hardening results in two types of artifact: 1)

distortion of metallic structures due to differential absorption, know as a cupping

artifact; and 2) streaks and dark bands that can appear between two dense objects.

The presence of dental restorations, including apically positioned retrograde

restorations, in the FOV can lead to severe streaking artifacts. As the CBCT x-ray

beam is heterochromatic and has lower mean kVp energy compared to conventional

CT, such artifact can be pronounced in CBCT images. In clinical endodontic practice,

CBCT scanners with a limited field of view might provide clearer images as they can

avoid scanning structures outside the region of interest susceptible to beam

hardening (e.g. metallic restorations, dental implants).

CBCT Applications in Endodontics

A PUBMED search performed in May 2009 [search terms: cone beam, CBCT,

endodontics, root canal, periapical) resulted in less than 30 comparative

retrospective or ex vivo studies published quantifying specific clinical efficacies of

CBCT imaging in endodontics. Similarly a recent review performed by the

SEDENTEXCT project indicated that while several non-systematic reviews in the

literature provide a favorable perspective of the role of CBCT imaging in

Page 14 of 47
endodontics, only a few studies have been published that satisfy the criteria for

formal systematic review[35].

While there are presently no definitive patient selection criteria for the use of

CBCT in endodontics, the use of CBCT in endodontic diagnosis should not be

avoided or ignored. One of the authors (ML) is a Board Certified Endodontist with a

full time private practice with limited field CBCT. CBCT has been used to assist

diagnosis and facilitate treatment in more than half of all patients referred to his

practice for assessment and treatment of complex endodontic conditions (Figs. 3

and 4).

Depending on the equipment used, CBCT exposure may subject a patient to

only slightly higher radiation doses than conventional 2D imaging – or considerably

more, so it is important that practitioners follow professional judgment in

minimizing the radiation dose to the patient to that deemed essential for optimal

diagnosis and treatment guidance. There should be justification of the exposure to

the patient such that the total potential diagnostic benefits are greater than the

uncertain detriment radiation exposure might cause. Published research, while

admittedly sparse, indicates that CBCT has several applications in selected

endodontic cases (Figs. 5 and 6). The absence of high prospective randomized

clinical trials underlines the need for further research on the treatment outcomes

related to CBCT applications in endodontic practice. At this time CBCT should not be

considered a replacement for standard digital radiographic applications. Rather,

CBCT is a complementary modality for specific applications [35].

Page 15 of 47
Preoperative Assessment

Tooth Morphology

The success of endodontic treatment depends on the identification of all root

canals so that they can be accessed, cleaned, shaped, and obturated [36]. The

prevalence of a second mesio-buccal canal (MB2) in maxillary first molars has been

reported to vary from 69% to 93% depending on the study method employed. This

variability occurs in the bucco-lingual plane where superimposition of anatomic

structures impedes detection of small structural density changes [37, 38].

Conventional radiographic techniques, at best can only detect up to 55% of these

configurations (Fig. 7) [39]. Ramamurthy, et al. [40] found that raters evaluating

different two dimensional film modalities were rarely able to detect more than a

50% presence of MB2 canals. They found differences in detection rates with

complementary metal oxide semiconductors (CMOS), analog film and

photostimulable phosphor plates (PSP) detecting 55%, 44% 39% of MB2 canals

respectively. Matherne, et al. [41] compared the ability of three board certified

endodontists to detect the number of root canals on intraoral digital (both charged-

couple device and photostimulable phosphor plate images with CBCT in 72

extracted teeth (3 equal groups of maxillary molars, mandibular premolars, and

mandibular incisors). They found that on average the observers failed to detect at

least one root canal in 40% of teeth using intraoral radiographs. CBCT evaluations

identified an average of 3.58 root canals (RCS) per maxillary molar, 1.21 per

mandibular premolar, and 1.5 per mandibular incisor. Evaluation of CCD images

demonstrated an average number of 1.0 RCS per mandibular incisor, 1.0 per

Page 16 of 47
mandibular first premolar, and 3.1 per maxillary molar. Evaluation of PSP images

demonstrated an average number of 1.3 RCS per mandibular incisor, 1.1 per

mandibular first premolar, and 3.0 per maxillary molar. Baratto-Filho, et al. [42]

investigated the internal morphology of extracted maxillary first molars by

comparing detection rates obtained using an operating microscope and CBCT to ex

vivo sections. They reported an ex vivo prevalence of a fourth canal in 67.14% of

teeth, and additional root canals in 92.85% of mesiobuccal roots. Clinical

assessment provided slightly lower overall (53.26%) but higher (95.63%) MB2

detection rates whereas CBCT results showed the lowest overall (37.05%) detection

rate. They indicated that CBCT provided a good method for the initial evaluation of

maxillary first molar internal morphology but that the use of operating microscopes

was optimal. Unpublished ex vivo research performed at our institution [33]

investigated the effect of increasing voxel resolution on the detection rate of

multiple observers of the MB2 on 24 maxillary first molars by CBCT. Compared to

the overall prevalence of MB2 (92% prevalence), CBCT detection rates increased

from 60% to 93.3% with increasing resolution suggesting that if CBCT is to be used

then resolutions in the order of 0.12 mm or less are optimal.

CBCT imaging has also been reported to characterize the high prevalence of

the disto-lingual canal in Taiwanese individuals [43], highlight anomalies in the root

canal system of mandibular premolars [44], and assist in the determination of root

curvature [45].

Page 17 of 47
Dental Periapical Pathosis

The most common pathologic conditions that involve teeth are the

inflammatory lesions of the pulp and periapical areas (Figs. 8, 9, 10 and 11).

Lofthag-Hansen, et al. [46] compared the accuracy of 3 observers using high

resolution limited FOV CBCT to intraoral radiographic paralleling technique using

two images, one with a horizontal tube shift difference of about 100 for the

diagnosis of periapical pathology on 46 teeth. While CBCT and intraoral radiographs

identified 53 roots with lesions, CBCT identified an additional 33 roots with lesions

(62%). Observers agreed that additional clinically relevant material was provided

by CBCT imaging in 32 of the 46 (69.5%) teeth imaged. Stavropoulos and Wenzel

[47] compared CBCT (NewTom 3G) to digital and film based intraoral periapical

radiography for the detection of periapical bone defects on 10 frozen pig mandibles

by four calibrated examiners. They reported that CBCT provides greater diagnostic

accuracy (61%) compared with digital (39%) and (44%) conventional radiographs.

Ozen, et al. [48] performed a similar study comparing the detection of chemically

induced periapical lesions by three observers using digital and film based

conventional radiography to two CBCT systems (Iluma, Imtec Imaging, Ardmore,

OK and iCAT, Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA). They found that CBCT

systems provided similar intra- and inter-observer agreement substantially higher

than either conventional radiography. They indicated that while detection rates for

CBCT were higher, they did not advocate the replacement of intraoral radiography

for detecting periapical lesions in routine clinical practice due to financial and dose

considerations.

Page 18 of 47
 Estrela, et al. [49] compared the accuracy of CBCT, panoramic and periapical

radiographs from a consecutive sample of 888 imaging exams of patients with

endodontic infection (1,508 teeth) in the detection of apical periodontitis (AP).

While a gold standard was not available, they found the detected prevalence of AP

to be significantly higher with CBCT (Fig. 12). Estrela and colleagues proposed a

periapical index based on cone beam computed tomography (CBCTPAI) for

identification of AP [50]. The CBCT PAI is a 6-point (0–5) scoring system calculated

from determining the largest lesional measurement in either the bucco-palatal,

mesio-distal, or diagonal dimension and taking into account expansion and

destruction of cortical bone. Using their criteria, 3 observers applied it to 1,014

images (periapical radiographs and high resolution CBCT images) originally taken

from 596 patients. They found that CBCT imaging detected 54.2% more AP lesions

than intraoral radiography alone. Similar results are reported by Low, et al. [51]

who compared the preoperative consensus assessment of the apical condition of 37

premolars and 37 molars in the maxilla (156 total roots) using periapical

radiography and CBCT referred for possible apical surgery and found the later

method to demonstrate significantly more lesions (34%) than conventional

radiography. CBCT showed significantly more findings including expansion of lesions

into the maxillary sinus, sinus membrane thickening, and missed canals. Using an

ex vivo model consisting of 2 mm diameter defects placed in the cancellous bone at

the apices of 10 first molar teeth on six partially dentate intact human dry

mandibles, Patel, et al. [52] reported a detection rate of 24.8% and 100% for

intraoral radiography and CBCT imaging respectively.

Page 19 of 47
 The generally higher detection rates afforded by CBCT are similar to those

reported for conventional CT [53]. This may be of clinical importance in patients

who present with pain or who have poorly localized symptoms associated with an

untreated or previously root treated tooth with no evidence of pathology identified

by conventional imaging [54-56].

Root Fracture

While root fractures are less common than fractures of the crown and occur

in only 7% or fewer of dental injuries [57, 58], they are difficult to diagnose

accurately using conventional radiography. Numerous authors have illustrated the

usefulness and importance of CBCT in the diagnosis and management in specific

aspects of dento-alveolar trauma, especially root fractures (Fig. 13) [59-62]

luxation and/or displacement and alveolar fracture [60]. CBCT has found particular

application for the diagnosis of root fractures. Hassan, et al. [63] compared the

accuracy of 4 observers in detecting ex vivo vertical root fractures (VRFs) on CBCT

and periapical images and assessed the influence of root canal filling on fracture

visibility. They found an overall higher accuracy for CBCT (0.86) scans than

periapical radiographs (0.66) for detecting VRF which was slightly reduced by the

presence of opaque obturation material. Similar results were reported by

Kamburoğlu, et al. [64] who compared the diagnostic accuracy of 3 oral and

maxillofacial radiologists in detecting simulated horizontal root fractures on

conventional radiographic (analog film, PSP and CCD-based digital) images and

CBCT of 36 teeth. They found that the sensitivity of CBCT (0.92) was significantly

greater than analog film (0.74), PSP (0.71) and CCD (0.68) images. Most recently

Page 20 of 47
Bernardes, et al. [65] retrospectively compared conventional periapical radiographs

and CBCT images for 20 patients with suspected root fractures. They found that

CBCT was able to detect fractures in 18 (90%) of patients whereas conventional

periapicals could only detect fractures 6 to 8 of the cases (30% to 40%) and

indicated that CBCT was an excellent supplement to conventional radiography in

the diagnosis of root fractures.

Root Resorption

The use of serial cross-sectional CT in diagnosing the size and location of

external root resorption (ERR) has been well described (Figs. 14 and 15) [66-68].

Similarly, several authors have presented selected cases illustrating the utility of

CBCT in the detection of small lesions, localizing and differentiation the resorption

from other conditions, classification of the lesion, in determining prognosis and

directing treatment (Figs. 14 and 15) [54, 69-73]. The accuracy of CBCT in the

detection of surface defects, while higher than conventional imaging modalities, is

not perfect [73] and appears to increase with increasing voxel resolution of the

volumetric dataset [30]. CBCT has also been shown to have particular application in

the assessment of the post orthodontic apical root resorption [74] and, in

particular, of the roots of lateral maxillary incisors by impacted maxillary canines

[75-77].

Internal root resorption (IRR) within the root canal itself is rare, usually

asymptomatic, slowly progressing, and presents as a serendipitous finding on

intraoral radiographic examination. The inflammatory etiology of the resorptive

Page 21 of 47
process is not fully understood, although IRR has been associated with a history of

trauma, persistent chronic pulpitis and as well as orthodontic treatment. It is very

common that internal and external inflammatory root resorption are confused and

misdiagnosed. Still, accurate assessment is essential as these conditions represent

totally different pathological processes, with different etiological factors and

treatment protocols. Diagnosis using conventional radiography is difficult however,

unlike external resorption, which presents with irregular radiolucency and intact

root canal, internal resorption has clearly defined borders with no canal

radiographically visible in the defect (Fig. 16) [78]. CBCT has been used

successfully to confirm the presence of IRR and differentiate it from ERR [71].

Post-Operative Assessment

Monitoring the healing of apical lesions is an important aspect of post

operative assessment in endodontics. Pinsky, et al. [79] investigated the accuracy

of CBCT (iCAT with 0.2mm voxel resolution) in the detection of the simulated

osseous defects of varying diameters and depths in an acrylic block and on the

buccal cortex of a human mandible. They found mean accuracy for the acrylic block

to be within the tolerance of the nominal resolution of the CBCT unit (–0.01 mm

±0.02 [SE] mean width difference and –0.03 mm ±0.01 [SE] mean height

difference). For the human mandible, they found differences to be slightly higher

(mean width accuracy, –0.07 mm (±0.02 SE); mean height accuracy, –0.27 mm

(±0.02 SE). In addition they segmented the defect and applied and automated

algorithm to calculate volume. They found that automated volume accuracy error

Page 22 of 47
was significantly higher (–6.9 mm3 (±4 SE)) than manually derived measurements

(–2.3 mm3 (±2.6 SE)).

As adequacy of root canal obturation is an important determinant of

endodontic success, it might be considered that CBCT be used in the initial and

subsequent monitoring of the integrity of root canal fillings. Sogur, et al. [80]

compared the subjective quality of 3 radiologists and 3 endodontists using limited

field CBCT, storage phosphor plate (SPP) and F-speed analog film images for the

evaluation of length and homogeneity of root fillings on 17 extracted permanent

mandibular incisor teeth. They found that SPP and F-speed film images were

perceived as superior to the corresponding CBCT images and they reported that this

may be due to the presence of streaking artifacts from the gutta percha and sealer

compromising the quality of those images as regards root filling evaluations.

The utility of CBCT in determining the precise nature of a perforation and the

role of this on subsequent treatment has been illustrated by Young (Fig. 17) [81].

Endodontic surgery is often complicated in the posterior teeth by their

proximity to anatomical structures. The mandibular teeth can be close to the

mandibular canal while maxillary molars are often close to the maxillary sinus.

CBCT imaging provides several advantages for preoperative treatment planning

especially in maxillary posterior teeth with apical pathology [82]. Rigolone, et al.

[83] first described the value of CBCT in planning for endodontic surgery. They

imaged 43 maxillary first molars on 31 patients referred for re-treatment and

measured the mean distance of the palatine root from the external vestibular

cortex (Mean; 9.73mm) and the frequency that the maxillary sinus lateral recess

Page 23 of 47
lay between the roots (25%) to evaluate the ability to surgically approach the

palatal root of a maxillary molar from a vestibular access as opposed to the more

difficult palatal access. They concluded that CBCT may play an important role in

optimizing palatine root apicoectomy via directing surgery through vestibular

access. The importance of CBCT for apical surgery of teeth adjacent to the

maxillary sinus has subsequently been illustrated by Nakata, et al. [56] who

presented a case report localizing the presence of a peri-radicular lesion to a

specific root and Tsurumachi and Honda [84] who described the use of CBCT in

localizing a fractured endodontic instrument protruding into the maxillary sinus

prior to periapical surgery. Most recently Low et al. [51] compared the pre-

operative findings obtained from periapical radiography and CBCT of 2 observers in

the diagnosis of posterior maxillary teeth (37 premolars and 37 molars - a total of

156 roots) referred for possible apical surgery. They found CBCT demonstrated

significantly more lesions (34%) than conventional radiography. They also reported

that numerous additional clinically relevant findings were seen significantly more

frequently in CBCT images including expansion of lesions into the maxillary sinus,

sinus membrane thickening, and missed canals.

Conclusion

Conventional intraoral radiography provides clinicians with an accessible, cost

effective, high resolution imaging modality that continues to be of value in

endodontic therapy. There are, however, specific situations, both pre- and post-

operatively, where the understanding of spatial relationships afforded by CBCT

Page 24 of 47
facilitates diagnosis and influences treatment. The usefulness of CBCT imaging can

no longer be disputed – CBCT is a useful task specific imaging modality and an

important technology in comprehensive endodontic evaluation.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Lakshmi S. Garladinne-Nethi,

BDS, MS, current graduate student in Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of

Connecticut for her assistance in the preliminary stages of the manuscript. Unless

otherwise indicated, CBCT data for all figures were acquired on a KODAK 9000 3D

at 0.076mm resolution and reformatted using KODAK Dental Imaging software

v.6.8.6.0 [PracticeWorks, Atlanta, GA].

Page 25 of 47
References

1. Langland, EE, Langlais RP, Early pioneers of oral and maxillofacial radiology.

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:496-511.

2. Jacobson PH, Fedran RJ. Making darkness visible: The discovery of X-ray and

its introduction to dentistry. JADA 1995;126:1359-1370,.

3. Farman AG, Levato CM, Scarfe WC. 3D X-ray: An update. Inside Dentistry

2007;3(6):70-74.

4. Walton RE. Diagnostic Imaging A. Endodontic Radiography. In. Ingles’

Endodontics. 6th ed. Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC eds. BC Decker

Inc. Hamilton, Ontario Canada 2008 pp. 554.

5. Rushton VE, Horner K, Worthington HV. Screening panoramic radiology of

adults in general dental practice: radiological findings. Br Dent J

2001;190:495-501.

6. Gröndahl H-G, Huumonen S. Radiographic manifestations of periapical

inflammatory lesions. Endodontic Topics 2004;8:55–67.

7. Goldman M, Pearson AH, Darzenta N. Endodontic success--who's reading the

radiograph? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1972;33:432-437.

8. Goldman M, Pearson AH, Darzenta N. Reliability of radiographic

interpretations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1974;38:287-293.

9. Farman AG. Image-guidance: The present future of dental care. Pract

Proceed Aesthet Dent 2006;18:342-344.

Page 26 of 47
10. Farman AG, Levato CM, Scarfe WC. A primer on cone beam computed

tomography. Inside Dentistry 2007;3:90-92.

11. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam

computed tomography in dental practice. J Canad Dent Assoc 2006;72:75-

80.

12. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Cone beam computed tomography: a paradigm shift

for clinical dentistry. Ausralasian Dent Pract 2007;Jul-Aug:102-110.

13. Hayakawa Y, Sano T, Sukovic P, Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Cone Beam

Computed Tomography – a paradigm shift for clinical dentistry. Nippon Dent

Rev 2005;65:125-132.

14. Kursağlu P, Sukovic P, Scarfe WC, Farman AG. Dental Volumetrik Bilgisayarli

Tomograti [Dental Volumetric Computed Tomography] Akademik Dental

Dişhekimliği Dergisi 2005;26:30-36.

15. Farman AG, Levato C, Scarfe WC, Chenin D. Cone beam CT trends towards

hybrid systems and third party software utilization. Inside Dentistry

2008;4(9):102-105.

16. Valentin J. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on

Radiological Protection: Publication 103, Ann ICRP 37, pp. 1–332, 2009.

17. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct

digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS

panoramic unit. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003;32:229–234.

Page 27 of 47
18. Gijbels F, Sanderink G, Wyatt J, Van Dam J, Nowak B, Jacobs R. Radiation

doses of indirect and direct digital cephalometric radiography. Br J Radiol

2004;197:149-152.

19. Roberts JA, Drage NA, Davies J, Thomas DW Effective dose from cone beam

CT examinations in dentistry. Br J Radiol 2009;82:35-40.

20. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT

devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-

CAT. Dentomaxillofacl Radiol 2006;35:219–226.

21. Coppenrath E, Draenert F, Lechel U, Veit R, Meindl T, Reiser M, Mueller-Lisse

U, Cross-Sectional Imaging in Dentomaxillofacial Diagnostics: Dose

Comparison of Dental MSCT and NewTom 9000 DVT. Rofo. 2008, vol. 180,

pp. 396-401

22. Hirsch E, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Silva MAG. Dosimetry of the cone beam

computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo

in different fields of view. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:268–273.

23. Lofthag-Hansen S, Thilander-Klang A, Ekestubbe A, Helmrot E, Grōndahl K.

Calculating effective dose on a cone beam computed tomography device: 3D

Accuitomo and 3D Accuitomo FPD. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:72–79.

24. Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E, Pauwels R, Vanheusden S, Suetens P,

Marchal G, Sanderink G, Jacobs R. Comparison between effective radiation

dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J

Radiol 2008;Jul 16. [Epub ahead of print]

Page 28 of 47
25. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and

64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral

Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:106-114.

26. Okano T, Harata Y, Sugihara Y, Sakaino R, Tsuchida R, Iwai K, Seki K, Araki

K. Absorbed and effective doses from cone beam volumetric imaging for

implant planning. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009;38:79-85.

27. Palomo JM, Rao PS, Hans MG. Influence of CBCT exposure conditions on

radiation dose. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod

2008;105:773-782.

28. Silva MAG, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Bumann A, Visser H, Hirsch E. Cone-beam

computed tomography for routine orthodontic treatment planning: A

radiation dose evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacl Orthop 2008a;133:640.e1-

640.e5.

29. Silva MAG, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Gründler K, Visser H, Hirsch E. Effective

dosages for recording Veraviewepocs dental panoramic images: analog film,

digital, and panoramic scout for CBCT. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral

Radiol Endod 2008;106:571-577.

30. Ludlow JB. Dosimetry of the Kodak 9000 3D Small FOV CBCT and Panoramic

Unit. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;107: e29.

31. Farman AG, Farman TT. A comparison of 18 different x-ray detectors

currently used in dentistry. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod

2005;99:485-489.

Page 29 of 47
32. Liedke GS, da Silveira HE, da Silveira HL, Dutra V, de Figueiredo JA.

Influence of voxel size in the diagnostic ability of cone beam tomography to

evaluate simulated external root resorption. J Endod 2009;35:233-235.

33. Bauman M. The effect of cone beam computed tomography voxel resolution

on the detection of canals in the mesiobuccal roots of permanent maxillary

first molars. MS Thesis. University of Louisville School of Dentistry Masters in

Oral Biology, Louisville, Kentucky, USA. May, 2009.

34. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent

Clin N Am 2008;52:707-730.

35. SEDENTEXCT. Radiation protection: Cone beam CT for dental and

maxillofacial radiology. Provisional guidelines [v1.1 May 2009)

36. Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral

Med Oral Pathol 1984;58:589-599.

37. Pineda F. Roentgenographic investigation of the mesio-buccal root of the

maxillary first molar. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1973;36:253-260.

38. Nance R, Tyndall D, Levin LG, Trope M. Identification of root canals in molars

by tuned-aperture computed tomography. Int J Endod 2000;33:392-396.

39. Ramamurthy R, Scheetz JP, Clark SJ, Farman AG. Effects of imaging system

and exposure on accurate detection of the second mesio-buccal canal in

maxillary molar teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod

2006;102:796-802.

Page 30 of 47
40. Ramamurthy R, Scheetz JP, Clark SJ, Farman AG. Effects of imaging system

and exposure on accurate detection of the second mesio-buccal canal in

maxillary molar teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod

2006;102:796-802.

41. Matherne RP, Angelopoulos C, Kulild JC, Tira D. Use of cone-beam computed

tomography to identify root canal systems in vitro. J Endod 2008;34:87-89.

42. Baratto F, Zaitter S, Haragushiku GA, de Campos EA, Abuabara A, Correr

GM. Analysis of the internal anatomy of maxillary first molars by using

different methods. J Endod 2009;35:337-342.

43. Tu MG, Huang HL, Hsue SS, Hsu JT, Chen SY, Jou MJ, Tsai CC. Detection of

permanent three-rooted mandibular first molars by cone-beam computed

tomography imaging in taiwanese individuals. J Endod 2009;35:503-507.

44. Cleghorn BM, Christie WH, Dong CC. Anomalous mandibular premolars: a

mandibular first premolar with three roots and a mandibular second premolar

with a C-shaped canal system. Int J Endod 2008;41:1005-1014.

45. Estrela C, Bueno MR, Sousa-Neto MD, Pécora JD. Method for determination of

root curvature radius using cone-beam computed tomography images.

Brazilian Dent J 2008;19:114-118.

46. Lofthag-Hansen S, Huumonen S, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl, 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;103:114-119.

Page 31 of 47
47. 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;11:101-106.

48. Ozen T, Kamburoğlu K, Cebeci AR, Yüksel SP, Paksoy CS. Interpretation of

chemically created periapical lesions using 2 different dental cone-beam

computerized tomography units, an intraoral digital sensor, and conventional

film. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107:426-432.

49. Estrela C, Bueno MR, Leles CR, Azevedo B, Azevedo JR. Accuracy of cone

beam computed tomography and panoramic and periapical radiography for

detection of apical periodontitis. J Endod 2008;34:273-279.

50. Estrela C, Bueno MR, Azevedo BC, Azevedo JR, Pécora JD. A new periapical

index based on cone beam computed tomography. J Endod 2008;44:1325-

1331.

51. Low KM, Dula K, Bürgin W, von Arx T. Comparison of periapical radiography

and limited cone-beam tomography in posterior maxillary teeth referred for

apical surgery. J Endod 2008;557-562.

52. Patel S, Dawood A, Mannocci F, Wilson R, Pitt Ford T. Detection of periapical

bone defects in human jaws using cone beam computed tomography and

intraoral radiography. Int J Endod 2009;42:507-515.

53. Jorge EG, Tanomaru-Filho M, Gonçalves M, Tanomaru JM. Detection of

periapical lesion development by conventional radiography or computed

Page 32 of 47
 tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106,

e56-61.

54. Cotton TP, Geisler TM, Holden DT, Schwartz SA, Schindler WG. Endodontic

applications of cone-beam volumetric tomography. J Endod 2007;33:1121-

1132.

55. Patel S, Dawood A, Ford TP, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone

beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int

J Endod 2007;40:818-830.

56. 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;32:583-587.

57. Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM. Classification, etiology and epidemiology. In:

Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM, eds. Textbook and color atlas of traumatic

injuries to the teeth. 3rd ed. Copenhagen, Denmark: Munksgaard; 1994;

pp.151–216.

58. M. Cvek, G. Tsilingaridis, J. O. Andreasen. Survival of 534 incisors after intra-

alveolar root fracture in patients aged 7–17 years. Dental Traumatol

2008;24:379-387.

59. Tyndall DA, Rathore S. Cone-beam CT diagnostic applications: caries,

periodontal bone assessment, and endodontic applications. Dent Clin N Am

2008;52:825-841.

Page 33 of 47
60. Cohenca N, Simon JH, Roges R, Morag Y, Malfaz JM. Clinical indications for

digital imaging in dento-alveolar trauma. Part 1: traumatic injuries. Dent

Traumatol 2007;23:95-104.

61. Ilgüy D, Ilgüy M, Fisekcioglu E, Bayirli G. Detection of jaw and root fractures

using cone beam computed tomography: a case report. Dentomaxillofac

Radiol 2009;38:169-173.

62. S. Patel, New dimensions in endodontic imaging: Part 2. Cone beam

computed tomography. Int Endod J 2009;42:463-475.

63. Hassan B, Metska ME, Ozok AR, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR. Detection of

vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth by a cone beam

computed tomography scan. J Endod 2009;35:719-722.

64. Kamburoğlu K, Cebeci AR, Gröndahl HG. Effectiveness of limited cone-beam

computed tomography in the detection of horizontal root fracture. Dental

Traumatol 2009;25:256–261.

65. Bernardes RA, de Moraes IG, Duarte MA, Azevedo BC, de Azevedo JR,

Bramante CM. Use of cone-beam volumetric tomography in the diagnosis of

root fractures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009 Mar

7.[Epub ahead of print].

66. Kim E, Kim KD, Roh BD, Cho YS, Lee SJ. Computed tomography as a

diagnostic aid for extracanal invasive resorption. J Endod 2003;29:463–465.

Page 34 of 47
67. Gulsahi A, Gulsahi K, Ungor M. Invasive cervical resorption: clinical and

radiological diagnosis and treatment of 3 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral

Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103: e65-72.

68. da Silveira HL, Silveira HE, Liedke GS, Lermen CA, Dos Santos RB, de

Figueiredo JA. Diagnostic ability of computed tomography to evaluate

external root resorption in vitro. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007;36:393-396.

69. Patel S, Dawood A. The use of cone beam computed tomography in the

management of external cervical resorption lesions. Int J Endod

2007;40:730-737.

70 Maini A, Durning P, Drage N. Resorption: within or without? The benefit of

cone-beam computed tomography when diagnosing a case of an

internal/external resorption defect. Br Dent J 2008;204:135-137.

71. Cohenca N, Simon JH, Mathur A, Malfaz JM. Clinical indications for digital

imaging in dento-alveolar trauma. Part 2: root resorption. Dent Traumatol

2007;23:105-113.

72. Patel S, Kanagasingam S, Pitt Ford T. External cervical resorption: a review. J

Endod 2009;35:616-625.

73. Hahn W, Fricke-Zech S, Fricke J, Gruber RM, Dullin C, Zapf A, Hannig C,

Kubein-Meesenburg D, Sadat-Khonsari R. Detection and size differentiation

of simulated tooth root defects using flat-panel volume computerized

tomography (fpVCT). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod

2009;107:272-278.

Page 35 of 47
74. Dudic A, Giannopoulou C, Leuzinger M, Kiliaridis S. Detection of apical root

resorption after orthodontic treatment by using panoramic radiography and

cone-beam computed tomography of super-high resolution. Am J Orthod

Dentofac Orthop 2009;135:434-437.

75. Walker L, Enciso R, Mah J. Three-dimensional localization of maxillary

canines with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac

Orthop 2005;128:418-423.

76. Liu DG, Zhang WL, Zhang ZY, Wu YT, Ma XC. Localization of impacted

maxillary canines and observation of adjacent incisor resorption with cone-

beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol

Endod 2008;105:91-98.

77. Hechler SL. Cone-beam CT: applications in orthodontics. Dent Clin N Am

2008;52:809-823.

78. Gulabivala K, Searson LJ. Clinical diagnosis of internal resorption: an

exception to the rule. Int Endod J 1995;28:255-260.

79. Pinsky HM, Dyda S, Pinsky RW, Misch KA, Sarment DP. Accuracy of three-

dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol

2006;35:410-416.

80. Sogur E, Baksı BG, Gröndahl H-G. Imaging of root canal fillings: a

comparison of subjective image quality between limited cone-beam CT,

storage phosphor and film radiography. Int Endod J 2007;40:179–185.

Page 36 of 47
81. Young GR. Contemporary management of lateral root perforation diagnosed

with the aid of dental computed tomography. Am Endod J 2007;33:112-118.

82. Patel S, Dawood A, Ford TP, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone

beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int

Endod J 2007;40:818-830.

83. Rigolone M, Pasqualini D, Bianchi L, Berutti E, Bianchi SD. Vestibular surgical

access to the palatine root of the superior first molar: "low-dose cone-beam"

CT analysis of the pathway and its anatomic variations. J Endod

2003;29:773-775.

84. Tsurumachi T, Honda K. A new cone beam computerized tomography system

for use in endodontic surgery. Int J Endod 2007;40:224-232.

Page 37 of 47
FIGURES

Figure 1 Examples of hybrid CBCT units. [a] KODAK Dental Imaging 9000 3D,

[b] Veraviewepocs 3D and, [c] Picasso Trio.

Figure 2 A 52 year old Caucasian female was referred for assessment of

multiple periapical areas associated with the mandibular right first and

second molars. Curved planar [a], axial [b] and correlated multiple

cross-sectional [c] images are shown. There are areas of mixed central

opacity and peripheral radiolucency associated with the apices of the

teeth however no expansion, tooth resorption or displacement are

evident. Hypercementosis is observed on the distal root of the first

molar. On clinical examination, all teeth in this quadrant tested vital.

Based on a working diagnosis of florid cemento-osseous dysplasia, an

additional digital panoramic radiograph [d) cropped panoramic image]

was performed and revealed similar bony patterns in the left posterior

maxilla and mandible. Management of this patient comprised a 6

month recall comparison of focused CBCT images to judge the

progression of the lesion.

Figure 3 After suffering a traumatic blow from a soccer ball six years earlier, a

28 year old male presented with a soft, convex shaped indurated

buccal and lingual swelling in the mandibular symphyseal region. A

periapical image [a] showed a large, multi-locular lesion. External

inflammatory root resorption (EIRR) was noted on the mandibular left

lateral incisor. All four mandibular anterior teeth tested non-vital.

Page 38 of 47
 CBCT images [b) curved planar, c) cross-sectional, d) axial, e) 3D

reconstruction] showed that the resorptive lesion was extended from

the root canal space to the periodontal membrane, necessitating repair

or extraction; no exploratory procedure was necessary to determine

the extent of the defect.

Figure 4 A 79 year old male was referred for endodontic treatment of the

maxillary left central incisor after a palatal sinus tract was noted. CBCT

imaging was initially performed with a gutta percha cone marker

inserted into the sinus tract to determine the source of the infection.

Sagittal images [a] demonstrated that the lesion terminated at the

peri-apex of the maxillary left central incisor after coursing through the

incisive canal whereas drainage was visible on the axial image [b].

Peri-operatively, only the mesio-distal direction could be determined

on conventional intraoral periapical radiography [c] and treatment

suspended when the explorer reached 17mm because of the danger of

perforation in the facial or palatal direction. Subsequent cross-

sectional peri-operative CBCT imaging [d] with an intra-canal gutta

percha marker indicated that the initial access preparation was

directed palatally. Correction of the access facially resulted in gaining

access to the apical terminus; treatment was completed without

complication.

Figure 5 Treatment of large destructive lesions associated with pulpal pathosis

benefit from 3D imaging providing better visualization of the spatial

Page 39 of 47
 relationships of the tooth to anatomic landmarks and canal

morphology. This patient presented with mild dysthesia of the right

mandibular dentition. Conventional periapical imaging [a]

demonstrated a large apical and mesial ill defined rarefaction

associated with the right mandibular second molar in close proximity

to the inferior alveolar nerve. CBCT images [b) sagittal, c) cross-

sectional, d) axial] demonstrate the proximity of the lesion to the

mandibular canal (MC). Therefore during treatment great care was

taken to prevent obturation material extrusion past the apical terminus

and possible traumatization of the IAN. Additional para-sagittal CBCT

images document the progression of healing at 6 months [e]. In

addition digital subtraction composite 3D imaging at 6-months [f]

provides three-dimensional visualization of healing. (Data acquired at

0.076mm resolution on an KODAK Dental Imaging 9000 DS [Dental

Imaging/Practiceworks Atlanta, GA, USA] and 3D subtraction

composite reformatted using InVivo Dental [Anatomage, San Jose,

CA]).

Figure 6 A female patient presented with a twenty year history of mostly

continuous, unilateral, poorly localized severe aching of the maxillary

left quadrant. The pain was not associated with sensory loss or other

physical signs and pulp tests, and conventional imaging studies were

within normal limits. Clinically there was no cessation of pain after

administration of local anesthetic. This neuropathic pain syndrome,

initially termed atypical facial pain, is more recently known as

Page 40 of 47
 persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP). PIFP refers to pain along the

territory of the trigeminal nerve that does not fit the classic

presentation of other cranial neuralgias. Diagnostically challenging,

PIFP is frequently misdiagnosed and is often attributed by patients to

dental procedures, facial trauma and rarely, by some clinicians, as

Neuralgia-Inducing Cavitational Osteonecrosis (NICO). Dynamic

visualization of sequential curved planar para-sagittal CBCT

reformatted images at 0.076mm thickness [a] confirmed the absence

of obvious pathosis of odontogenic origin as diagnosed from the

original intraoral periapical of the region [b]. Note the radiolucent area

within the coronal portion of the first molar under the radiopaque

disto-occlusal restorative material; this represents a streak artifact due

to “photo starvation” in the horizontal plane due to the attenuation of

adjacent amalgam and radiopaque material and subsequent reduction

in available data for image reconstruction. A negative CBCT imaging

finding is often very reassuring for these unfortunate patients who

often question a non-odontogenic diagnosis. Psychiatric symptoms of

depression and anxiety are prevalent in this population and compound

the diagnostic conundrum.

Figure 7 Maxillary first and second molars often present treatment challenges

because of the frequent presence of mesio-accessory (mb2) canals. On

initial periapical radiographic examination of this previously treated

maxillary left first molar, no mb2 canal was detected however a

periapical lesion is seen [a]. Note the overlap of the interproximal

Page 41 of 47
 contacts between the molars indicating a geometric distortion in the

horizontal plane. CBCT imaging [b) 0.076mm axial and, c) 0.076 para-

sagittal] clearly demonstrates an additional canal that was not

previously treated.

Figure 8 On conventional intraoral periapical radiography periapical mucositis

(PM) presents as a relatively radiopaque, soft-tissue, dome-shaped

lesion localized to the apex of a maxillary posterior tooth and

projecting into the floor of the maxillary sinus. Most are

indistinguishable from mucosal lesions of intrinsic sinus origin such as

antral mucosal pseudocysts (see Fig. 9). While clinically asymptomatic,

they are usually associated with necrotic or failing root canal filled

teeth. PM is a localized mucosal thickening of the sinus membrane,

secondary to a breach of periradicular inflammation and will resolve

after successful endodontic treatment. This patient gave a history of

persistent left side pain over the maxillary molar region of 4 months

duration. Treatment for sinusitis did not relieve the symptoms.

Panoramic and intraoral dental radiology did not reveal a cause.

Coronal CBCT imaging [a] demonstrates acute sinusitis bilaterally with

50% to 70% opacification and previous uncinectomy and antrostomy

(as evidenced by the loss of the superior medial wall of the right sinus)

of the right sinus, whereas the left sinus shows thickened mucosal

lining with a dome shaped soft tissue lesion overlying the roots of the

restored left maxillary first molar tooth. 5mm reformatted panoramic

[b] and 1mm cross-sectional [c] reconstructions of the maxillary left

Page 42 of 47
 first molar shows periapical lesional penetration and communication

with the floor of the sinus in this region. Data acquired on an iCAT,

Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA USA at 0.3mm resolution

and reformatted using InVivo Dental, Anatomage, San Jose, CA.)

Figure 9 Antral mucosal pseudocysts, also called mucus retention cysts, are a

relatively common localized dome shaped antral mucosal swelling,

often of allergic origin and while they can occur anywhere in the sinus

present diagnostic challenges when associated with the floor of the

maxillary sinus. CBCT imaging [a) sagittal, b) cross-sectional] can be

useful in differentiating these lesions from periapical mucositis in that

the former are usually not associated with disruption of the floor of the

sinus and expansion superiorly from the apex of roots of adjacent

teeth.

Figure 10 A periapical radiograph of the maxillary left first molar [a] shows an

area of low density surrounding the mesial root with incomplete

endodontic treatment. A contemporaneous CBCT para-sagittal image

[b] shows a chronic periradicular osteoperiostitis, or "halo lesion,"

where the apical periodontitis has caused displacement of the

periosteum but did not penetrate the antral floor. Three months after

retreatment, CBCT imaging [c] demonstrates complete apical

resolution.

Figure 11 This patient was referred for discomfort and swelling in the maxillary

right quadrant. While an initial periapical radiograph [a] clearly

Page 43 of 47
 demonstrated an untreated mesial root in the maxillary first molar,

periradicular periodontitis was undetectable. CBCT images [a) axial, b)

sagittal] clearly identify a large apical radiolucent lesion associated

with the mesial root extending to the disto-buccal root. The tooth was

re-treated and the symptoms subsided.

Figure 12 Difficulty in visualizing furcal and apical lesions with periapical

radiography due to lack of coverage, anatomic superimposition and

geometric distortion is well established. The periapical radiograph [a]

of the maxillary right second molar in an asymptomatic patient is

unremarkable however there is lack of coverage of the second molar

posteriorly and marked superimposition of the distal root of the first

molar over the mesial root of the second molar. The corresponding

cropped sagittal CBCT image [b] of the second molar demonstrates a

furcal radiolucency and associated periradicular periodontitis.

Subsequent clinical investigation found this tooth to be non-vital.

Figure 13 Traumatic injuries to the anterior dentition may result in a horizontal

root fracture. Visualizing these fractures with periapical radiographs

can be difficult as the beam must be in parallel alignment to the axis

of the fracture. Conventional periapical image [a] shows horizontal

radiolucent line separating the apical 1/3rd of the root. Note the loss of

lamina dura and lateral radiolucency on the distal root surface

adjacent to the horizontal radiolucency. Cross-sectional high resolution

(0.076mm) image showing “V” shaped fracture and minimal

Page 44 of 47
 displacement of the root segments. Note the loss of buccal cortical

plate, widening of the buccal periodontal ligament space and periapical

rarefaction.

Figure 14 This patient was referred for endodontic revision of the mandibular

right lateral incisor. Initial periapical radiographic examination of the

mandibular anterior teeth including the left anterior [a] was

unremarkable. Note the appearance of a large radiolucency at the on

the distal surface of the left canine due to non-perpendicular x-ray

beam projection of the distal curvature of the cervical margin. CBCT

images [b) right cross-sectional, c) left cross-sectional, d) axial]

demonstrated an occult finding of early ERR on the mandibular left and

right mandibular cuspids. Early detection and classification of the

lesion improve the prognosis and assist in early direct treatment

consisting of surgical exposure, removal of granulation tissue from the

resorbing lacunae and sealing.

Figure 15 Replacement external resorption associated with root canal filled right

maxillary central incisor. An oblique multiplanar reformatted

“panoramic” image [a] shows the dentition with minimal restorations

and a single root canal filled maxillary right central incisor; note the

obturation is large in relation to the width of the adjacent left maxillary

central suggesting endodontic treatment at an early age. Sequential

1mm cross-sectional [b] and para-sagittal [c] images show bone

trabecular-like replacement of the superior and palatal aspects of the

Page 45 of 47
 root indicative of replacement resorption. Initial management

consisted of conventional endodontic treatment. Because of the

questionable long term prognosis of the apical resorptive lesions,

periodic CBCT imaging is recommended with a view towards surgical

revision therapy consisting of apicoectomy and retrograde root canal

treatment. (Data acquired on an iCAT, Imaging Sciences International,

Hatfield, PA USA at 0.4mm resolution and reformatted using InVivo

Dental, Anatomage, San Jose, CA)

Figure 16 Because two dimensional imaging suffers from superimposition of

anatomic structures, determination of the extent and pathogenesis of

periradicular lesions can present diagnostic challenges. This is

particularly true of the maxillary posterior region, where the roots of

teeth overlap and anatomic structures form complex patterns. A

patient presented with discomfort in the maxillary right that extended

from the nose to the ear. On clinical examination buccal swelling and

induration were present – all teeth tested vital except the maxillary

right first molar. A periapical radiograph [a] demonstrated areas of low

density at the apices of the maxillary right first and second molars.

CBCT images [b) 10mm curved planar, c) axial, d) sagittal, e) cross-

sectional] however demonstrated a much more extensive (21.4mm

maximum length) unilocular lesion, centered on the palatal root of the

maxillary first molar, and extending anteriorly to the second bicuspid

and posteriorly to the second molar. Also note the large internal

resorptive lesion at the mid-palatal root of the maxillary first molar,

Page 46 of 47
 not visible on the periapical radiograph. Biopsy confirmed the lesion to

be a periapical granuloma with abscess formation.

Figure 17 Iatrogenic perforative defects can be difficult to confirm by periapical

radiography alone. This patient was referred for evaluation and

possible endodontic revision of the mandibular right lateral incisor

because of chronic sensitivity to occlusal forces. CBCT images [a)

axial, b) sagittal] demonstrate a mid-root post perforation.

Page 47 of 47
 Table 1. Current Commercially Available CBCT Equipment

Unit Model(s) Manufacturer / Distributor

Accuitomo 3D Accuitomo - XYZ Slice View J. Morita Mfg. Corp., Kyoto, Japan
Tomograph / Veraviewpacs 3D
Asahi PSR 9000N (Alphard 3030) Asahi Roentgen, Kyoto, Japan / Distributed by Belmont, Somerset, NJ, USA
Roentgen
Galileos Galileos Sirona Dental Systems, Charlotte, NC, USA
GENDEX CB 500 Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, USA / Distributed by Gendex, Chicago, IL,
USA
Hitachi CB MercuRay / CB Throne Hitachi Medical Corp., Chiba-ken, Japan
iCAT Classic/ Next Generation Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, USA
ILUMA Ultra Cone Beam CT Scanner IMTEC Imaging Ardmore, OK, USA / Distributed by GE Healthcare, Piscataway, NJ, USA
KaVo 3D eXam Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, USA / Distributed by KaVo Dental Corp.,
Biberach, Germany
KODAK 9000 3D / 9500 3D KODAK Dental Systems, Carestream Health Rochester NY, USA, / Distributed exclusively
in the USA by PracticeWorks, Atlanta, GA, USA

Newtom 3G / NewTom VG QR, Inc. Verona, Italy / Dent-X Visionary Imaging, Elmsford, NY, USA
ORION RCB-888 Ritter Imaging GmbH, Ulm, Germany
Picasso Trio / Pro / Master E-Woo Technology Co.,Ltd, /Vatech, Giheung-gu, Korea
Series
PreXion 3D PreXion, Inc. San Mateo, CA, USA
Promax 3D Planmeca OY, Helsinki, FInland
Ritter Orion RCB-888 Ritter Imaging GmbH, Ulm, Germany
Scanora Scanora 3D CBCT SOREDEX, Tuusula, Finland
SkyView 3D Panoramic imager My-Ray Dental Imaging, Cefla Dental Group, Imola, Italy
Suni 3D Suni Corp., CA, USA
TeraRecon Fine Cube Yoshida Dental Mfg. Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan/ Distributed by TeraRecon, Inc., San
Mateo, CA, USA
 Table 2. Reported Comparative Radiation Effective Dose (E2007) from Selected Medium and Full FOV CBCT Systems.

Dosea
Absolute Comparative
Digital No. of days of annual
Effective Dosea panoramic per capita background
CBCT Unit Ref. Technique (µSv) equivalentb c

CB MercuRay 16 100 kVp 12-in/9-in/6-in 479/402/369 34/29/26 58/49/45

16 120 kVp 12-in/9-in/6-in 761/680/603 54/49/40 93/83/73
17 Implant mode 511 36.5 62
18 19cm (Max/Stand)/15cm Pan/ 10cm I 1073/569/560/407 77/41/40/20 131/69/68/50
Galileos 18 Default/Maximum 70/128 5/9.1 8.5/15.6
i-Cat Next Gen 18 (portrait-17cm/landscape-13cm) 74 / 87 5.3/6.2 9/10.6
i-Cat Classic 19 22cm/13cm(40s/10s) 82/77/48 5.9/5.5/3.4 10/9.4/5.8
20 6cm Mn (HR/LR) 189 / 96 13.5/6.86 23/11.7
20 6cm Mx (HR/LR) 93 / 59 6.6/4.2 11/7.2
20 22cm/full 206/134 14.7/9.6 25/16
21 13cm 61.1 4.4 7.4
Iluma 18 20s / 40s 98 / 498 7/35.6 11.9/60.6
Newtom 9000 21 23cm 56.2 4 6.9
Newtom 3G 22 12-in (Male/female) 93/ 95 6.6/6.8 11.3/11.6
18 19cm 68 4.9 8.3
19 6/9/12-in 57/191/30 4/13.6/2.1 6.9/23.2/3.7
a
Using 2007 ICRP calculations; bMedian of published effective dose for digital dental panoramic radiography = 14µSv; c Annual per capita =
3.0 mSv (3,000µSv) per annum.
 Table 3. Reported Comparative Radiation Effective Dose (E2007) for Limited, “Focused” or Small FOV CBCT Systems.

Dosea
Absolute Comparative
Digital No. of days of annual
Effective Dosea panoramic per capita background
CBCT Unit Ref. Technique (µSv) equivalentb c

Kodak 9000 3D 30 Mx Post / Mx Ant / Mn Post / Mn Ant 9.8/5.3/38.3/21.7 .7/.4/2.7/1.6 1.2/.6/4.7/2.6

PreXion 3D 18 Standard/High Res 189/388 13.5/27.7 23/47
ProMax 3D 18 Small/Large 488/652 35/47 59/79
3D Accuitomo 23 Ant (4x4 cm/6x6 cm) 20/43 1.4/3.1 2.5/5.2
rd
24 Min (Mn PM) - Max (Mn 3 Mol) 11 - 77 .8 - 5.5 2.5 - 5.2
19 Mx (Ant/PM/Mol) 29/44/29 2/3.2/2 3.5/5.3/3.5
Mn (Ant/PM/Mol) 13/22/29 .9/1.6/2 1.6/2.7/3.5
17 II/FPD Large / FPD Small 30/102/50 2.1/7.3/3.6 3.6/12.4/6
Veraview 23 Ant (4x4 cm/ 8x4 cm/ pan + 4x4 cm) 31/40/30 2.2/2.9/2.1 3.8/4.9/3.6
25 4x4 cm 2.9 .2 .06
a b c
Using 2007 ICRP calculations; Median of published effective dose for digital dental panoramic radiography = 14µSv; Annual per capita =
3.0 mSv (3,000µSv) per annum
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17