Comparison of Accuracy of Digital Periapical Radiography with Digital Bitewing in Evaluation of Bone Resorption in Posterior Teeth

Ehsan  Rafiei; Elnaz  Safari; Roshanak  Ghaffari

doi:10.18502/ijds.v17i1.5918

Ehsan Rafiei Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
Elnaz Safari Dentist, Isfahan, Iran
Roshanak Ghaffari Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijds.v17i1.5918

Keywords: Alveolar bone loss, Radiography, Periodontal diseases

Abstract

Introduction: Radiography is a valuable adjunct to the diagnosis of periodontal disease. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of two periapical radiographic and digital biting techniques in assessing bone resorption in posterior teeth of patients with chronic periodontitis.

Materials and Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was performed on 36 samples of interproximal surfaces of posterior teeth in patients with chronic periodontitis, candidate of flap surgery referring to the department of periodontitis, faculty of dentistry, Islamic Azad University of Isfahan (Khorasgan) in 2015. First two methods of imaging include periapical and digital bitewing were performed and the necessary distances were measured by a radiologist. Then, during surgery, and before the bone contour correction, the distance from the reference point to the alveolar bone shaft (gold standard) was measured by a Williams probe. Data were analyzed using Paired t-test. (α = 0.05).

Result: Out of 36 specimens, respectively in bitewing and periapical radiographs 2 and 1 cases were equal with clinical and in 16 (44.4%) and 20 (55.6%) distances were more. The average difference of amount of bone resorption in bitewing was 0.2 ± 0.12 mm and there was no significant difference between estimated mean value (p value = 0.01). Average difference of amount of bone resorption in periapical to clinical method was 0.87 ± 0.26 it was significant difference (p value = 0.001).

Conclusion: According to result, the use of bitewing radiography to determine the rate of bone resorption in posterior teeth is preferable to periapical radiography.