DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gomes-Filho, I.
Right arrow Articles by de Santana Passos, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gomes-Filho, I.
Right arrow Articles by de Santana Passos, J
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2007) 36, 256-262
© 2007 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/25386411

RESERACH

Radiographic features of periodontal bone defects: evaluation of digitized images

IS Gomes-Filho*,1, VA Sarmento1, MS de Castro1, NP da Costa2, SS da Cruz1, SC Trindade1, COT de Freitas1 and J de Santana Passos1

1 Department of Periodontics, Feira de Santana State University, Bahia, Brazil; 2 Department of Radiology, School of Dentistry, Pontifícia Universidade Católica, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

*Correspondence to: Isaac Suzart Gomes-Filho, Av. Getúlio Vargas, 379, Centro. Feira de Santana, Bahia, 44025-010, Brazil; Email: isuzart{at}gmail.com

Received 13 March 2006; revised 23 June 2006; accepted 28 June 2006

Objectives: Radiographic evaluation of periodontal conditions is a difficult process because of the many limitations inherent to this complementary examination and the lack of image specificity for different types of bone defects. The objectives of this study are to utilize digitized imaging resources to describe the radiographic features of different types of periodontal bone defects produced artificially in dry mandibles.

Methods: 14 dry mandibles were utilized, in which periodontal bone defects were produced. Digital photographs and conventional radiographs of each site were obtained in a standardized manner, before and after producing these defects. The radiographs were then digitized, displayed on the screen and evaluated by three examiners.

Results: Most of the bone defects presented distinct imaging characteristics that allowed them to be identified, with the exception of one-, two- and three-wall infrabony defects. The defects that were most easily interpreted were horizontal and vertical defects and the most difficult were defects in the radicular septum.

Conclusions: Despite the importance of imaging diagnoses in reaching clinical decisions regarding treatment, such diagnoses for different types of periodontal bone defects are extremely difficult to make. In the present study, the utilization of digital tools for interpreting digitized radiographic images facilitated the process.

Keywords: digitized image; periodontal lesions; radiographic interpretation






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 2007 by the British Institute of Radiology.