Download PDF
Rofo 2019; 191(03): 192-198
DOI: 10.1055/a-0636-4129
Review
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Dental Imaging – A basic guide for the radiologist

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Max Masthoff
1   Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Mirjam Gerwing
1   Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Malte Masthoff
2   Dental Group Practice Masthoff and Trapmann, Marl, Germany
,
Maximilian Timme
3   Clinic for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Johannes Kleinheinz
3   Clinic for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Markus Berninger
4   Department of Trauma Surgery, BG Trauma Center Murnau, Germany
,
Walter Heindel
1   Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Moritz Wildgruber
1   Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
,
Christoph Schülke
1   Institute of Clinical Radiology, Medical Faculty – University of Muenster – and University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

22 February 2018

04 May 2018

Publication Date:
18 June 2018 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background As dental imaging accounts for approximately 40 % of all X-ray examinations in Germany, profound knowledge of this topic is essential not only for the dentist but also for the clinical radiologist. This review focuses on basic imaging findings regarding the teeth. Therefore, tooth structure, currently available imaging techniques and common findings in conserving dentistry including endodontology, periodontology, implantology and dental trauma are presented.

Methods Literature research on the current state of dental radiology was performed using Pubmed.

Results and Conclusion Currently, the most frequent imaging techniques are the orthopantomogram (OPG) and single-tooth radiograph, as well as computer tomography (CT) and cone beam CT mainly for implantology (planning or postoperative control) or trauma indications. Especially early diagnosis and correct classification of a dental trauma, such as dental pulp involvement, prevents from treatment delays or worsening of therapy options and prognosis. Furthermore, teeth are commonly a hidden focus of infection.

Since radiologists are frequently confronted with dental imaging, either concerning a particular question such as a trauma patient or regarding incidental findings throughout head and neck imaging, further training in this field is more than worthwhile to facilitate an early and sufficient dental treatment.

Key points 

  1. This review focuses on dental imaging techniques and the most important pathologies.

  2. Dental pathologies may not only be locally but also systemically relevant.

  3. Reporting of dental findings is important for best patient care.

Citation Format

  • Masthoff M, Gerwing M, Masthoff M et al. Dental Imaging – A basic guide for the radiologist. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2019; 191: 192 – 198

Key words

dental imaging techniques - endodontology - periodontology - implantology - dental trauma
 

  • References

  • 1 Jordan RA, Bodechtel C, Hertrampf K. et al. The Fifth German Oral Health Study (Funfte Deutsche Mundgesundheitsstudie, DMS V) – rationale, design, and methods. BMC Oral Health 2014; 14: 161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Oenning AC, Jacobs R, Pauwels R. et al. Cone-beam CT in paediatric dentistry: DIMITRA project position statement. Pediatr Radiol 2017; DOI: 10.1007/s00247-017-4012-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 2: clinical applications. Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30: 1285-1292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Uhlig J, Fischer U, Surov A. et al. Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT: Analysis of optimal acquisition time for discrimination of breast lesion malignancy. Eur J Radiol 2018; 99: 9-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Casselman JW, Gieraerts K, Volders D. et al. Cone beam CT: non-dental applications. JBR-BTR 2013; 96: 333-353
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Posadzy M, Desimpel J, Vanhoenacker F. Cone beam CT of the musculoskeletal system: clinical applications. Insights Imaging 2018; 9: 35-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rehan OM, Saleh HAK, Raffat HA. et al. Osseous changes in the temporomandibular joint in rheumatoid arthritis: A cone-beam computed tomography study. Imaging Sci Dent 2018; 48: 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Abuhaimed A, Martin CJ. Evaluation of coefficients to derive organ and effective doses from cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans: A Monte Carlo study. J Radiol Prot 2017; DOI: 10.1088/1361-6498/aa9b9f.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Loubele M, Bogaerts R, Van Dijck E. et al. Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol 2009; 71: 461-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 European Comission. Cone Beam CT for Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology: Evidence Based Guidelines. 172. Radiation Protection Publication; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Pauwels R. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial imaging: dose matters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2015; 165: 156-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Rehani MM, Gupta R, Bartling S. et al. Radiological Protection in Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). ICRP Publication 129. Ann ICRP 2015; 44: 9-127
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ballanti F, Lione R, Fiaschetti V. et al. Low-dose CT protocol for orthodontic diagnosis. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2008; 9: 65-70
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kyriakou Y, Kolditz D, Langner O. et al. Digital volume tomography (DVT) and multislice spiral CT (MSCT): an objective examination of dose and image quality. Rofo 2011; 183: 144-153
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Loubele M, Jacobs R, Maes F. et al. Radiation dose vs image quality for low-dose CT protocols of the head for maxillofacial surgery and oral implant planning. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 117: 211-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hofmann E, Medelnik J, Fink M. et al. Three-dimensional volume tomographic study of the imaging accuracy of impacted teeth: MSCT and CBCT comparison--an in vitro study. Eur J Orthod 2013; 35: 286-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hofmann E, Schmid M, Lell M. et al. Cone beam computed tomography and low-dose multislice computed tomography in orthodontics and dentistry: a comparative evaluation on image quality and radiation exposure. J Orofac Orthop 2014; 75: 384-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hofmann E, Schmid M, Sedlmair M. et al. Comparative study of image quality and radiation dose of cone beam and low-dose multislice computed tomography--an in-vitro investigation. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 301-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C. et al. Effective dose of dental CBCT-a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20140197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B. et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 267-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Detterbeck A, Hofmeister M, Hofmann E. et al. MRI vs CT for orthodontic applications: comparison of two MRI protocols and three CT (multislice, cone-beam, industrial) technologies. J Orofac Orthop 2016; 77: 251-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Puertas A, Magan-Fernandez A, Blanc V. et al. Association of periodontitis with preterm birth and low birth weight: a comprehensive review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2018; 5: 597-602
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Pitts NB, Zero DT, Marsh PD. et al. Dental caries. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2017; 3: 17030
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Palotie U, Eronen AK, Vehkalahti K. et al. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation. J Dent 2017; 62: 13-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Moraschini V, Fai CK, Alto RM. et al. Amalgam and resin composite longevity of posterior restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015; 43: 1043-1050
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ribeiro DM, Reus JC, Felippe WT. et al. Technical quality of root canal treatment performed by undergraduate students using hand instrumentation: a meta-analysis. Int Endod J 2017; DOI: 10.1111/iej.12853.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Armitage GC. Development of a classification system for periodontal diseases and conditions. Ann Periodontol 1999; 4: 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kaur S, Bright R, Proudman SM. et al. Does periodontal treatment influence clinical and biochemical measures for rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2014; 44: 113-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Engebretson S, Kocher T. Evidence that periodontal treatment improves diabetes outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2013; 84: S153-S169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Graziani F, Gennai S, Solini A. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic observational evidence on the effect of periodontitis on diabetes An update of the EFP-AAP review. J Clin Periodontol 2018; 45: 167-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kebede TG, Pink C, Rathmann W. et al. Does periodontitis affect diabetes incidence and haemoglobin A1c change?. An 11-year follow-up study. Diabetes Metab 2017; DOI: 10.1016/j.diabet.2017.11.003.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Sanz M, Ceriello A, Buysschaert M. et al. Scientific evidence on the links between periodontal diseases and diabetes: Consensus report and guidelines of the joint workshop on periodontal diseases and diabetes by the International Diabetes Federation and the European Federation of Periodontology. J Clin Periodontol 2018; 45: 138-149
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Jepsen S, Stadlinger B, Terheyden H. et al. Science transfer: oral health and general health – the links between periodontitis, atherosclerosis and diabetes. J Clin Periodontol 2015; 42: 1071-1073
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Zarb GA. Clinical application of osseointegration. An introduction. Swed Dent J Suppl 1985; 28: 7-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hanif A, Qureshi S, Sheikh Z. et al. Complications in implant dentistry. Eur J Dent 2017; 11: 135-140
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Ramanauskaite A, Juodzbalys G. Diagnostic Principles of Peri-Implantitis: a Systematic Review and Guidelines for Peri-Implantitis Diagnosis Proposal. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2016; 7: e8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Bezroukov V. The application of the International Classification of Diseases to dentistry and stomatology. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1979; 7: 21-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Cohenca N, Silberman A. Contemporary imaging for the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic dental injuries: A review. Dent Traumatol 2017; 33: 321-328
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Tamimi D. Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Radiol Clin North Am 2018; 56: 105-124
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar