Clinical use of cone-beam computed tomography in Western Norway: a referral-based retrospective study

Authors

  • Marianne L. Vollan Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
  • Linda Cecilie Kleppe Hasselgren Oral Health Centre of Expertise in Western Norway (TkVestland), Bergen, Norway
  • Xie-Qi Shi Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden
  • Malin V. Jonsson Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Oral Health Centre of Expertise in Western Norway (TkVestland), Bergen, Norway

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2340/aos.v83.41943

Keywords:

CBCT, clinical indication, referral, justification

Abstract

Objective: To elucidate cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) referral profiles in Western Norway.

Materials and methods: In all, 3,031 referrals to oral- and maxillofacial radiologist were reviewed. Patient data were retrieved retrospectively from electronic charts. The patient’s age, gender, and perceived clinical indication were noted, as well as relevant medical and dental history and whether the referring clinician was a general dentist or held a clinical dental specialty.

Results: A total of 2,680 referrals fulfilled the inclusion criteria (UiB n = 1,471, and TkVestland, n = 1,209). The female:male ratio was 1,427:1,253. Mean age was 33 years – 35 years for females compared to 31 years for males (p < 0.001).

The most common clinical indications were related to impacted teeth (29%), endodontic issues (17%), cleft lip palate (12%), and resorptions (10%). Less common were bone lesions, implant planning, trauma to the teeth or jaws, atypical orofacial pain, and temporo-mandibular joint (TMJ). The patient age-profiles mirrored differences in indications within the cohort. Most referrals were from specialist dentists such as orthodontists, oral surgeons, and endodontists. Interestingly, 543/2,680 (20%) referrals were from general dentists. 

Conclusions: Specialist dentists such as orthodontists, oral surgeons, and endodontists refer most patients for clinical indications such as impacted teeth, endodontic issues, and resorptions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2-4):1-332.

Horner K. RADIATION PROTECTION N° 172 https://www.sedentexct.eu/content/guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology.htm2012. Available from: https://www.sedentexct.eu/content/guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology.htm.

Smith BR, Park JH, Cederberg RA. An evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography use in postgraduate orthodontic programs in the United States and Canada. J Dent Educ. 2011 Jan;75(1):98-106.. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.2011.75.1.tb05028.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.2011.75.1.tb05028.x

Strindberg JE, Hol C, Torgersen G, Møystad A, Nilsson M, Nässtrom K, et al. Comparison of Swedish and Norwegian Use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: a Questionnaire Study. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2015 Oct-Des;6(4):e2. https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2015.6402 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2015.6402

Yalda FA, Holroyd J, Islam M, Theodorakou C, Horner K. Current practice in the use of cone beam computed tomography: a survey of UK dental practices. Br Dent J. 2019 Jan;226(2):115-124. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.49 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.49

Brown J, Jacobs R, Levring Jaghagen E, Lindh C, Baksi G, Schulze D, et al. Basic training requirements for the use of dental CBCT by dentists: a position paper prepared by the European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014 Jan;43(1):20130291. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130291 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130291

Nikolic-Jakoba N, Spin-Neto R, Wenzel A. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Detection of Intrabony and Furcation Defects: A Systematic Review Based on a Hierarchical Model for Diagnostic Efficacy. J Periodontol. 2016 Jun;87(6):630-644. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2016.150636 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2016.150636

Schulze RKW. Editorial 1/2018. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018 Feb;47(2):20170359. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20170359 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20170359

Svenson B, Ståhlnacke K, Karlsson R, Fält A. Dentists’ use of digital radiographic techniques: Part II - extraoral radiography: a questionnaire study of Swedish dentists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2019 Mar;77(2):150-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2018.1525763 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2018.1525763

Hol C, Hellen-Halme K, Torgersen G, Nilsson M, Møystad A. How do dentists use CBCT in dental clinics? A Norwegian nationwide survey. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015 Apr;73(3):195-201. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.979866 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.979866

StatisticsNorway. StatBank. https://www.ssb.no/statbank/table/11961/ Statistisk sentralbyrå; 2023 [cited 2023 Mar 08].

Norge H. Who pays your dental bill? 2023 [cited 2023 Aug 14). Available from: https://www.helsenorge.no/en/payment-for-health-services/who-pays-your-dental-bill/#dental-treatment-for-adolescents-(1920-and-2124-years-of-age)

DSA. Strålevernforskriften. Available from: https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2016-12-16-1659

DSA. Veileder 14. Direktoratet for strålevern og atomsikkerhet; 2017.Available from: https://dsa.no/publikasjoner/veileder-14-veileder-om-stralebruk-innen-odontologi/Veileder_14_odontologi.pdf

DSA. Veileder 5. Direktoratet for strålevern og atomsikkerhet; 2014. Available from: https://dsa.no/publikasjoner/_/attachment/inline/70e8470f-6c36-46fc-9e97-c27298859d66:22ab78bd659798c58cc3ce55c07dbb9aad9b44a0/Veileder%205_rev-mai2023.pdf

StatisticsNorway. StatBank 2023 [cited 2023 Aug 14). Available from: https://www.ssb.no/statbank/table/07459/

Horner K, Barry S, Dave M, Dixon C, Littlewood A, Pang CL, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry: a systematic review. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2020 Aug;21(4):407-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-019-00504-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-019-00504-x

Dolekoglu S, Fisekcioglu E, Ilguy M, Ilguy D. The usage of digital radiography and cone beam computed tomography among Turkish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011 Sep;40(6):379-384. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/27837552 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/27837552

Yalcinkaya SE, Berker YG, Peker S, Basturk FB. Knowledge and attitudes of Turkish endodontists towards digital radiology and cone beam computed tomography. Niger J Clin Pract. 2014 Jul-Aug;17(4):471-478. https://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.134044 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.134044

Suzuki H, Fujimaki S, Chigono T, Yamamura M, Sakabe R, Sakabe J, et al. Survey on the using limited area cone beam CT in pediatric dentistry. Japan J Pediatr Dent. 2006 Sep;44:609-616.

Hidalgo-Rivas JA, Theodorakou C, Carmichael F, Murray B, Payne M, Horner K. Use of cone beam CT in children and young people in three United Kingdom dental hospitals. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2014 Sep;24(5):336-348. https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12076

Alqerban A, Hedesiu M, Baciut M, Nackaerts O, Jacobs R, Fieuws S, et al. Pre-surgical treatment planning of maxillary canine impactions using panoramic vs cone beam CT imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013 Aug;42(9):20130157. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130157 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130157

Haney E, Gansky SA, Lee JS, Johnson E, Maki K, Miller AJ, et al. Comparative analysis of traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography volumetric images in the diagnosis and treatment planning of maxillary impacted canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 May;137(5):590-597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.06.035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.06.035

Matzen LH, Wenzel A. Efficacy of CBCT for assessment of impacted mandibular third molars: a review - based on a hierarchical model of evidence. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015 Jan;44(1):20140189. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140189

Botticelli S, Verna C, Cattaneo PM, Heidmann J, Melsen B. Two- versus three-dimensional imaging in subjects with unerupted maxillary canines. Eur J Orthod. 2011 Aug;33(4):344-349. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq102

Alqerban A, Willems G, Bernaerts C, Vangastel J, Politis C, Jacobs R. Orthodontic treatment planning for impacted maxillary canines using conventional records versus 3D CBCT. Eur J Orthod. 2014 Dec;36(6):698-707. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt100 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjt100

Wriedt S, Jaklin J, Al-Nawas B, Wehrbein H. Impacted upper canines: examination and treatment proposal based on 3D versus 2D diagnosis. J Orofac Orthop. 2012 Jan;73(1):28-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-011-0058-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-011-0058-8

Christell H, Birch S, Bondemark L, Horner K, Lindh C, SEDENTEXCT concortium. The impact of Cone Beam CT on financial costs and orthodontists’ treatment decisions in the management of maxillary canines with eruption disturbance. Eur J Orthod. 2018 Jan;40(1):65-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx039

Ihlis RL, Giovanos C, Liao H, Ring I, Malmgren O, Tsilingaridis G, et al. Cone beam computed tomography indications for interdisciplinary therapy planning of impacted canines. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2023 Jan;135(1):e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2022.06.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2022.06.013

Hermann L, Norholt SE, Wenzel A, Taneja P, Matzen LH. Does cone beam CT change the treatment decision for maxillary second and third molars? A prospective study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2023 Oct;52(7):20230128. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20230128 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20230128

Yadav R, Mittal S, Tewari S, Gupta A, Duhan J, Sangwan P, et al. Evaluation of amniotic membrane in the healing of apicomarginal defects using 2D and 3D imaging modalities: a randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int. 2022 Apr;53(5):436-448.

Ramis-Alario A, Soto-Penaloza D, Tarazona-Alvarez B, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Oltra D. Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of 2D radiography and cone beam computed tomography in persistent apical periodontal disease: A PRISMA-DTA systematic review and meta-analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2021 Oct;132(4):e153-e168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2021.07.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2021.07.002

Parmar PD, Dhamija R, Tewari S, Sangwan P, Gupta A, Duhan J, et al. 2D and 3D radiographic outcome assessment of the effect of guided tissue regeneration using resorbable collagen membrane in the healing of through-and-through periapical lesions - a randomized controlled trial. Int Endod J. 2019 Jul;52(7):935-948.https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13098

Kruse C, Spin-Neto R, Wenzel A, Kirkevang LL. Cone beam computed tomography and periapical lesions: a systematic review analysing studies on diagnostic efficacy by a hierarchical model. Int Endod J. 2015 Sep;48(9):815-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12388 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12388

Guerrero ME, Botetano R, Beltran J, Horner K, Jacobs R. Can preoperative imaging help to predict postoperative outcome after wisdom tooth removal? A randomized controlled trial using panoramic radiography versus cone-beam CT. Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Jan;18(1):335-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0971-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0971-x

Andresen AKH, Jonsson MV, Sulo G, Thelen DS, Shi XQ. Radiographic features in 2D imaging as predictors for justified CBCT examinations of canine-induced root resorption. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2022 Jan;51(1):20210165. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20210165 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20210165

Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making. 1991 Apr-Jun;11(2):88-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9101100203 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9101100203

Kuhnisch J, Anttonen V, Duggal MS, Spyridonos ML, Rajasekharan S, Sobczak M, et al. Best clinical practice guidance for prescribing dental radiographs in children and adolescents: an EAPD policy document. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2020 Aug;21(4):375-386.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-019-00493-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-019-00493-x

Downloads

Published

2024-09-26

Issue

Vol. 83: (2024) Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

Section

Research article

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Marianne L. Vollan, Linda Cecilie Kleppe Hasselgren, Xie-Qi Shi, Malin V. Jonsson

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.