Effect of calibration of a medical review monitor on the visibility of mandibular canal at dental implant sites: A cone beam CT study

0Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the visibility of mandibular canal (MC) on cone beam CT (CBCT) images using a medical review monitor under two different calibration modes. The effect of age, gender, and location of the dental implant site was also assessed. Materials and Methods: CBCT images of 428 dental implant sites were selected for the study. Images were displayed twice on a medical review monitor using two different calibration modes: standard and DICOM, and two observers evaluated the visibility of the MC using four-point scoring scale (1-4, poor to excellent). Cohen Kappa was used to assess intra and inter-rater reliability. Chi-square test was used to compare proportions of MC visibility by gender and location and one-way ANOVA was used to compare mean age and MC visibility. Results: Each observer classified the visibility of MC with a total agreement of 100% between DICOM mode and standard mode (Kappa = 1, P < 0.001 for each observer). In each mode, a strong agreement (inter-rater reliability) was detected between the observers (Cohen's kappa = 0.88 for both modes, P < 0.001) with a percent agreement of 95.3% for each mode. Gender and location were not statistically associated with MC visibility (P > 0.05). Age, however, was a significant predictor of MC visibility (P < 0.05). Conclusions: DICOM calibration had no added value over standard calibration for assessing the visibility of MC at dental implant sites on a medical review monitor. Only the age had significant effect on the visibility.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Alkhader, M., Hudieb, M., & Kheirallah, K. (2020). Effect of calibration of a medical review monitor on the visibility of mandibular canal at dental implant sites: A cone beam CT study. Indian Journal of Dental Research, 31(6), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_420_19

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free