Cemento-osseous dysplasia of the jaw bones: key radiographic features
Cemento-osseous dysplasia of the jaw bones: key radiographic features
复制标题
DOI：
10.1259/dmfr/58488265
复制
发表时间：
2011-03-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Lam, E. W. N.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alsufyani, N. A.;Lam, E. W. N.
目的：探讨普通牙科医生(GP)和口腔颌面放射科医生(RGS)对牙骨质发育不良(COD)的影像诊断差异。方法：采用系统的客观测量工具，对50组COD及类似实体(致密骨岛、成牙骨质母细胞瘤、牙骨质骨化纤维瘤、纤维结构不良、复杂牙瘤和硬化性骨炎)进行检查。结果：RGS定位清晰的边界(OR6.67，P<；0.05)；透光的边缘(OR8.28，P<；0.005)；双侧病变(OR10.23，P<；0.01)；混合的透射线/不透射线的内部结构(OR10.53，P<；0.01)；无向心性骨质扩张(OR7.63，P<；0.05)；与前牙和后牙的关系(OR4.43，P<；0.05)是COD的关键特征。因此，RGS能够正确解释79.3%的COD病例。相反，全科医生认为无牙根吸收(OR4.52，P<；0.05)和与前牙和后牙相关(OR3.22，P=0.005)是唯一的关键特征，并能够正确解释38.7%的病例。结论：RGS和GPS在识别和解释与之相关的X线特征方面存在统计学差异(P<；0.001)。我们的结论是，只有当特征射线特征被正确识别并正确解释时，COD才能从射线学上与其他相似的实体区分开来。牙颌面放射学(2011)40,141-146。DOI：10.1259/dmfr/58488265
Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess possible diagnostic differences between general dentists (GPs) and oral and maxillofacial radiologists (RGs) in the identification of pathognomonic radiographic features of cemento-osseous dysplasia (COD) and its interpretation.Methods: Using a systematic objective survey instrument, 3 RGs and 3 GPs reviewed 50 image sets of COD and similarly appearing entities (dense bone island, cementoblastoma, cemento-ossifying fibroma, fibrous dysplasia, complex odontoma and sclerosing osteitis). Participants were asked to identify the presence or absence of radiographic features and then to make an interpretation of the images.Results: RGs identified a well-defined border (odds ratio (OR) 6.67, P < 0.05); radiolucent periphery (OR 8.28, P < 0.005); bilateral occurrence (OR 10.23, P < 0.01); mixed radiolucent/radiopaque internal structure (OR 10.53, P < 0.01); the absence of non-concentric bony expansion (OR 7.63, P < 0.05); and the association with anterior and posterior teeth (OR 4.43, P < 0.05) as key features of COD. Consequently, RGs were able to correctly interpret 79.3% of COD cases. In contrast, GPs identified the absence of root resorption (OR 4.52, P < 0.05) and the association with anterior and posterior teeth (OR 3.22, P = 0.005) as the only key features of COD and were able to correctly interpret 38.7% of COD cases.Conclusions: There are statistically significant differences between RGs and GPs in the identification and interpretation of the radiographic features associated with COD (P < 0.001). We conclude that COD is radiographically discernable from other similarly appearing entities only if the characteristic radiographic features are correctly identified and then correctly interpreted. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2011) 40, 141-146. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/58488265