Is a Pre-Existent Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Able to Detect Metal Dental Posts?

TL;DR

This study compares how well cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and regular dental X-rays detect metal dental posts, finding that regular X-rays are more reliable.

Contribution

The study demonstrates that CBCT scans are less effective than periapical radiographs in detecting metal dental posts.

Findings

10.5% of teeth with a post on X-rays were missed by CBCT scans.

CBCT scans falsely identified 16.3% of prefabricated and 50% of cast posts.

Periapical radiographs are more accurate for detecting post-endodontic restoration status.

Abstract

(1) Background: In this study, the efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting dental posts was compared to periapical radiography. (2) Methods: A retrospective evaluation of 53 patients’ periapical radiographs and CBCT images was performed. The presence and type of the intra-canal dental post were initially determined on the periapical images (PA) radiographs’ examination and were then compared to the observer’s ability to detect the dental post on a CBCT image. The effect of the post’s type (metal cast or prefabricated) on its detection on CBCT images was determined. (3) Results: 10.5% of teeth that were identified as having a post on a PA radiograph were not identified as having a post on the CBCT examination (p < 0.05). Approximately 17.6% of teeth that were identified as not having a post on a PA radiograph were identified as having a post on the CBCT examination (p < 0.05). Moreover, 16.3% and 50% of teeth with a prefabricated or cast posts on PA radiographs were falsely identified on the CBCT examination, respectively (p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: A CBCT image is an insufficient tool for the identification of metal prefabricated and cast posts. A PA image is the recommended radiographic tool for achieving information about the post-endodontic restoration status of teeth candidates for endodontic retreatment in patients with a former CBCT scan.

Figures