Evaluation of the reliability of a new low dose CBCT acquisition protocol in diagnosing impacted canines: an ex-vivo imaging study

Permanent canines are the second most commonly impacted teeth after third molars with females being affected twice as much as males. Impacted canines can be located buccal, palatal or mid-alveolar and further be placed mesially, distally, horizontal, or inverted. Traditionally, permanent canines are radiographically localized using Clark’s method where a straight periapical radiograph of the area of interest/canine is taken, then the tube is shifted either mesial or distal to take a second radiograph. Another approach to localize an impacted canine could use a panoramic radiograph. Both of these 2D methods do not adequately depict the location of the tooth. To be able to localize the canine correctly is important for surgical exposure for further orthodontic treatment. More adequate imaging is 3D imaging in which a 360 degree Cone Beam CT (CBCT) is generally used, however, a different protocol using a 180 degree technique can reduce the radiation dose by 40%. This is important as it would limit the exposure of radiologically sensitive organs in the head and neck region.

[1]  P. Brockhurst,et al.  Distortions in panoramic radiographs. , 2002, Australian orthodontic journal.

[2]  S. Yadav,et al.  Diagnostic efficacy of a modified low-dose acquisition protocol for the preoperative evaluation of mini-implant sites , 2017, Imaging science in dentistry.

[3]  N. King,et al.  Complications associated with the occurrence and treatment of impacted maxillary canines. , 2014, Singapore dental journal.

[4]  V. Benetou,et al.  Reliability of different radiographic methods for the localization of displaced maxillary canines , 2018, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[5]  A. Farman,et al.  Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. , 2006, Journal.

[6]  A. Acar,et al.  A Review of Early Displaced Maxillary Canines: Etiology, Diagnosis and Interceptive Treatment , 2011, The open dentistry journal.

[7]  K. Russell,et al.  A review of impacted permanent maxillary cuspids--diagnosis and prevention. , 2000, Journal.

[8]  P. Mehrotra,et al.  Localization of impacted canines. , 2015, Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR.

[9]  B. Al-Nawas,et al.  Impacted upper canines: examination and treatment proposal based on 3D versus 2D diagnosis , 2011, Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie.

[11]  M. Ivanovic,et al.  Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. , 2008, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[12]  L Lorton,et al.  The incidence of unerupted permanent teeth and related clinical cases. , 1985, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[13]  C. A. Clark A Method of Ascertaining the Relative Position of Unerupted Teeth by Means of Film Radiographs , 1910, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[14]  A. Farman,et al.  What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? , 2008, Dental clinics of North America.

[15]  I. Hernandez-Giron,et al.  Dosimetry of a cone beam CT device for oral and maxillofacial radiology using Monte Carlo techniques and ICRP adult reference computational phantoms. , 2013, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[16]  S. Yadav,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of 2 cone-beam computed tomography protocols for detecting arthritic changes in temporomandibular joints. , 2015, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[17]  Sampath Anche,et al.  Impacted canines: Etiology, diagnosis, and orthodontic management , 2012, Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences.