Comparison between Conventional Modality Versus Cone-Beam Computer Tomography on the Assessment of Vertical Furcation in Molars

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the accuracy of diagnosis of vertical furcation subclass in molars using periapical radiographs (PAs) and clinical chartings compared against cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT) as the gold standard. The protocol involved examiners with different levels of experience. This retrospective radiographic study retrieved 40 molar teeth with full periodontal chartings, PAs, and CBCT records. Fifteen examiners with different levels of experience evaluated the PAs and periodontal chartings to assess the vertical depth of furcation and, thus, the vertical subclassification. CBCT was used as the gold standard for comparison. The accuracy of vertical furcal depth measured was assessed together with the accuracy of vertical subclassification assignment. The reliability of the conventional diagnostic modality among the examiners was also evaluated. A linear mixed model adjusted for the CBCT vertical furcal depth measurement was constructed to determine if tooth position, horizontal furcation distribution, and examiner experience level affect the bias in the vertical depth of furcation measurement. The reliability of the conventional periodontal diagnostic method in measuring vertical furcal depth was found to be fair, while vertical subclass assignment was moderate. Significantly better reliability during subclass assignment was found with mandibular molars (p < 0.001) and in maxillary molars with isolated buccal class II furcation. Within the study’s limitations, conventional periodontal diagnostics based on periapical radiographs and clinical periodontal chartings appear to be in poor to fair agreement with CBCT (gold standard) when measuring the vertical depth of furcation. Examiners with the least experience were more prone to bias when estimating the vertical furcal depth.