Comparison of mandibular radiomorphometric indices on digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography images in terms of osteoporosis risk detection
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7528103Keywords:
cone beam computerized tomography, osteoporosis, panoramic radiographyAbstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the assessment of mental index, mandibular cortical index and bone quality index on digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography.
Materials and Methods: Digital-panoramic-radiography and cone-beam-computerized-tomography images of 113 dental-patients who aged more than 45 years without systemic diseases were evaluated. The patients were divided into two groups according to mental-index (which was measured on panoramic-radiography) value set by £3 mm; the patients with osteoporosis risk and without. Mental-index was performed on both side(left-right), and the average value of two measurements was calculated. Mental-index, computerized-tomography-mental-index, mandibular-cortical-index, computerized-tomography-cortical-index and bone-quality-index were measured on digital-panoramic-radiography and cone-beam-computerized-tomography by two observers. Descriptive and logistic regression statistics were performed; p<0.05 was considered significant.
Results: The results of both methods were consistent with each other. For observers there were statistically significant differences between the osteoporotic risk-groups and the normal-groups for computerized-tomography-mental-index (p<0.001), mandibular-cortical-index/computerized-tomography-cortical-index, bone-quality-index. According to first and second observers’ measurements the optimum threshold value of computerized-tomography-mental-index was found respectively 3.01mm and 3.03mm for the risk of osteoporosis. The correlation(weighted-kappa-test) between mandibular-cortical-index and computerized-tomography-cortical-index values for observers’ evaluations respectively (1st and 2nd observer) was moderate and high. The frequency distributions of 1,2,3 classes were found significantly different(p<0.05) in both individuals with(osteoporotic) and without(healthy) risk of osteoporosis for bone-quality-index values in both digital-panoramic-radiography and cone-beam-computerized-tomography images.
Conclusions: cone-beam-computerized-tomography images can be used to assess the osteoporosis. By determining a threshold value in cone-beam-computerized-tomography, awareness of the patient can be raised by the dentist according to the status of these values, which can be easily measured on the image.
References
Navas Cámara FJ, Fernández de Santiago FJ, Bayona Marzo I, Mingo Gómez T, de la Fuente Sanz MM, Cacho del Amo A. Prevalence of osteoporosis assessed by quantitative ultrasound calcaneus measurements in institutionalized elderly population. An Med Interna 2006;23(8):374-378.
Compston J, Papapoulos S, Blanchard F. Report on osteoporosis in european community: current status and recommendations for the future. Work Party from Eur Memb States 1998;8:531-534.
Duncea I, Pop A, Georgescu CE. The relationship between osteoporosis and the panoramic mandibular index 1999;5(1):14-18.
Marina Melescanu I, Preoteasa E. For practitioner mandibular panoramic indexes predictors of skeletal osteoporosis for ımplant therapy. Curr Heal Sci 2009;35(4):219-225.
Taguchi A, Ohtsuka M, Tsuda M, et al. Risk of vertebral osteoporosis in post-menopausal women with alterations of the mandible. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 2007;36(3):143-148.
Lindh C, Horner K, Jonasson G, et al. The use of visual assessment of dental radiographs for identifying women at risk of having osteoporosis: the OSTEODENT project. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology 2008;106(2):285-293.
Božič M, Hren NI. Osteoporosis and mandibles. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2006;35(3):178-184.
Brown JP, Josse RG. 2002 Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. CMAJ 2002;167(10 Suppl):S1-S34.
Ledgerton D, Horner K, Devlin H, Worthington H. Panoramic mandibular index as a radiomorphometric tool: An assessment of precision. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 1997;26(2):95-100.
Mohajery M, Brooks SL. Oral radiographs in the detection of early signs of osteoporosis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992;73(1):112-117.
Yeler DY, Koraltan M, Hocaoglu TP, Arslan C, Erselcan T, Yeler H. Bone quality and quantity measurement techniques in dentistry. Cumhuriyet Dent J 2016;19(1):73-86.
Sherwood L. Human physiology; From cells to systems with 7th ed. Cengage Learning Publishing Co; 2008. e-book.
Ledgerton D, Horner K, Devlin H, Worthington H. Panoramic mandibular index as a radiomorphometric tool: An assessment of precision. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 1997;26(2):95-100.
Lindh C, Petersson A, Rohlin M. Assessment of the trabecular pattern before endosseous implant treatment: diagnostic outcome of periapical radiography in the mandible. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996;82(3):335-343.
Lekholm U, Zarb G. Patient selection and preparation. In: Quintessence, ed. Tissue Integrated Prostheses. Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Vol Quitessence publishing 1985:109-209.
Klemetti E, Vainio P. Effect of bone mineral density in skeleton and mandible on extraction of teeth and clinical alveolar height. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70(1):21-25.
Devlin H, Karayianni K, Mitsea A, et al. Diagnosing osteoporosis by using dental panoramic radiographs: The OSTEODENT project. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology 2007;104(6):821-828.
Hastar E, Yilmaz HH, Orhan H. Evaluation of mental index, mandibular cortical index and panoramic mandibular index on dental panoramic radiographs in the elderly. Eur J Dent 2011;5(1):60-67.
Basavaraj P. Evaluation of panoramic radiographs as a screening tool of osteoporosis in post menopausal women: a cross sectional study. J Clin Diagnostic Res 2013;7(ii):2051-2055. doi:10.7860/JCDR/2013/5853.3403.
Horner K, Devlin H, Harvey L. Detecting patients with low skeletal bone mass. J Dent 2002;30(4):171-175.
Devlin H, Horner K. Mandibular radiomorphometric indices in the diagnosis of reduced skeletal bone mineral density. Osteoporos Int 2002;13(5):373-378.
Vlasiadis KZ, Skouteris CA, Velegrakis GA, et al. Mandibular radiomorphometric measurements as indicators of possible osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Maturitas 2007;58(3):226-235.
White SC, Taguchi A, Kao D, et al. Clinical and panoramic predictors of femur bone mineral density. Osteoporos Int 2005;16(3):339-346.
Mahl C, Licks R, Fontanella W. Comparison of morphometric indices obtained from dental panoramic radiography for identifying individuals with osteoporosis osteopenia. radiol brass. 2008;41(3):183-187.
Noha M. Elkersh, Maha R. Talaab, Walid M. Ahmed, Yousria S. Gaweesh. Utility of cone beam computed tomography of the mandible in detecetion of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Alexandria Dental Journal 2019; 44:46-61.
Brasileiro CB, Chalub LLFH, Abreu MHNG, et al. Use of cone beam computed tomography in identifying postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos. 2017;12(1):26.
Secgin CK, Gulsahi A, Yavuz Y, Kamburoglu K. Comparison of mandibular index values determined from standard panoramic versus cone beam computed tomography reconstructed images. Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2019; 127:3
Yaşar F, Akgünlü F. The differences in panoramic mandibular indices and fractal dimension between patients with and without spinal osteoporosis. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 2006;35(1):1-9. doi:10.1259/dmfr/97652136.
Klemetti E, Kolmakov S, Kröger H. Pantomography in assessment of the osteoporosis risk group. Scand J Dent Res 1994;102(1):68-72.
Pal S, Amrutesh S. Evaluation of panoramic radiomorphometric indices in Indian population. Cumhur Dent J 2013;16(4):273-281. doi:10.7126/cdj.2013.1896.
Smith DE, Zarb GA. Criteria for success of osseointegrated endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62(5):567-572.
Byung DL, White SC. Age and trabecular features of alveolar bone associated with osteoporosis. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontology 2005;100(1):92-98.
Gulsahi A, Yüzügüllü B, Imirzalioǧlu P, Genç Y. Assessment of panoramic radiomorphometric indices in Turkish patients of different age groups, gender and dental status. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 2008;37(5):288-292. doi:10.1259/dmfr/19491030.
Taguchi A, Suei Y, Sanada M, et al. Validation of dental panoramic radiography measures for identifying postmenopausal women with spinal osteoporosis. Am J Roentgenol 2004;183(6):1755-1760.
Gulsahi A, Paksoy C, Ozden S, Kucuk N, Cebeci I, Genc Y. Assessment of bone mineral density in the jaws and its relationship to radiomorphometric indices. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 2010;39(5):284-289. doi:10.1259/dmfr/20522657.
Ledgerton D, Homer K, Devlin H, Worthington H. Radiomorphometric indices of the mandible in a British female population. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 1999;28(3):173-181. doi:10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600435.
Gomes C, Barbosa G, Bello R, Boscolo F, Almeida S. A Comparison of the mandibular Index on Panoramic and cross-sectional images from CBCT exams from osteoporosis risk group. Osteoporos Int 2014;25.
Koh KJ, Kim KA. Utility of the computed tomography indices on cone beam computed tomography images in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in women. Imaging Sci Dent 2011;41(3):101-106. doi:10.5624/isd.2011.41.3.101.
de Castro JGK, Carvalho BF, de Melo NS, de Souza Figueiredo PT, Moreira-Mesquita CR, de Faria Vasconcelos K, Jacobs R, Leite AF. A new cone-beam computed tomography-driven index for osteoporosis prediction. Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Sep;24(9):3193-3202. doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-03193-4.
Mostafa RA, Arnout EA and Abo el- Fotouh MM. Feasibility of cone-beam computed tomography radiomorphometric analysis and fractal dimension in assesment of postmenapousal osteoporosis in correlation with dual X-ray absorptiometry. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 2016; 45: 720160212.
Horner K, Devlin H. The relationship between mandibular bone mineral density and panoramic radiographic measurements. J Dent 1998;26(4):337-343.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Social and Analytical Health
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
JSOAH is licensed under a 