• Journal of Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.49-52
• /
• 1977

The authors had observed a case of cleidocranial dysostosis of 42 years old unmarried woman. The observation was founded upon roentgenogram of skull P-A view, orthopantomograph, cephalometric view, chest P-A view and wrist X-ray view. The patient gave a dwarfic impression with 145㎝ body height and concaved mandibular prognastic facial feature. The palate was narrowed and extremely high arched. The eruption state of teeth were extremely poor, only four teeth were erupted, composed of upper third molar and lower three deformed teeth. The skull P-A view of roentgenogram reveals overlying metopic suture, extends from the nasion to the sagittal suture, and the suture are delayed up to date and many wormian bones are formed. On the cephalometric view the maxilla is underdeveloped and produce the false mandibular prognathism. Twenty four impacted teeth can be detected by orthopantmograph, twelve in upper jaw and twelve in lower jaw. There are many supernumerary teeth, one in upper jaw and seven in lower jaw. On the chest P-A view, the clavicles are totally aplastic, but a vestige of clavicle is visible in the right side. On the wrist roentgenogram, the epiphyseal ossification of distal phalanx, mesial phalanx and proximal phalanx is delayed.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.51 no.1
• /
• pp.55-62
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study evaluated the influence of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) tool in a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) device on the diagnosis of vertical root fractures (VRFs) in teeth with different root filling materials. Materials and Methods: Forty-five extracted human premolars were classified into three subgroups; 1) no filling; 2) gutta-percha; and 3) metallic post. CBCT images were acquired using an Orthopantomograph 300 unit with and without a MAR tool. Subsequently, the same teeth were fractured, and new CBCT scans were obtained with and without MAR. Two oral radiologists evaluated the images regarding the presence or absence of VRF. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and diagnostic tests were performed. Results: The overall area under the curve values were 0.695 for CBCT with MAR and 0.789 for CBCT without MAR. The MAR tool negatively influenced the overall diagnosis of VRFs in all tested subgroups, with lower accuracy (0.45-0.72), sensitivity (0.6-0.67), and specificity (0.23-0.8) than were found for the images without MAR. In the latter group, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity values were 0.68-0.77, 0.67-083, and 0.53-087, respectively. However, no significant difference was found between images with and without MAR for the no filling and gutta-percha subgroups (P>0.05). In the metallic post subgroup, CBCT showed a significant difference according to MAR use (P<0.05). Conclusion: The OP 300 MAR tool negatively influenced the detection of VRFs in teeth with no root canal filling, gutta-percha, or metallic posts. Teeth with metallic posts suffered the most from the negative impact of MAR.