<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20130521//EN"
"http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en"
	xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JORM</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Journal of Oral &amp; Maxillofacial Research</journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="epub">2029-283X</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Stilus Optimus</publisher-name>
				<publisher-loc>Kaunas, Lithuania</publisher-loc>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">v1n1e6ht</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5037/jomr.2010.1106</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="article-type">
					<subject>Original Paper</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Reliability of Periapical Radiographs and Orthopantomograms in Detection of Tooth Root Protrusion in the Maxillary Sinus: Correlation Results with Cone Beam Computed Tomography</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author" id="contrib1" corresp="yes">
					<name>
						<surname>Hassan</surname>
						<given-names>Bassam A.</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
            <aff id="aff1" rid="aff1">
			<sup>1</sup>
			<institution>Department of Oral Radiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Amsterdam</institution>
			<country>Netherlands.</country></aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp>Bassam A. Hassan, 
				<institution>Department of Oral Radiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA)</institution>
				<addr-line>Louwesweg 1, NL-1066 EA, Amsterdam</addr-line>
				<country>Netherlands</country>
				<phone>+31-(0)20-5188561</phone>Fax: +31-(0)20-5188480<email>b.hassan@acta.nl</email>
				</corresp>
			</author-notes>
			<pub-date pub-type="collection">
			<season>Jan-Mar</season>
			<year>2010</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date pub-type="epub">
				<day>1</day>
				<month>4</month>
				<year>2010</year>
				</pub-date>
			<volume>1</volume>
			<issue>1</issue>
			<elocation-id>e6</elocation-id>
				<history>
				<date date-type="received">
				<day>13</day>
				<month>11</month>
				<year>2009</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
				<day>15</day>
				<month>12</month>
				<year>2009</year>
				</date>
				</history>
			<permissions>
				<copyright-statement> Copyright &#169; Hassan B. Published in the JOURNAL OF ORAL &amp; MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH
					(http://www.ejomr.org), 1 April 2010.</copyright-statement>
				<copyright-year>2010</copyright-year>
				<license license-type="open-access"
					xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">
					<license-p>This is an open-access article, first published in the JOURNAL OF
						ORAL &amp; MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH, distributed under the terms of the
						Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported
						License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and
						reproduction in any medium, provided the original work and is properly
						cited. The copyright, license information and link to the original
						publication on http://www.ejomr.org must be included.</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2010/1/e6/e6ht.htm"
				xlink:type="simple"/>
			<abstract>
			<title>ABSTRACT</title>
				<sec sec-type="objectives">
					<title>Objectives</title>
					<p>The purpose of the present study was to investigate the reliability of both 
  periapical radiographs and orthopantomograms for exact detection of 
  tooth root protrusion in the maxillary sinus by correlating the results 
  with cone beam computed tomography.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec sec-type="material and methods">
					<title>Material and Methods</title>
					<p>A database of 1400 patients scanned with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) 
  was searched for matching periapical (PA) radiographs and orthopantogram 
  (OPG) images of maxillary premolars and molars. Matching OPG images 
  datasets of 101 patients with 628 teeth and PA radiographs datasets of 
  93 patients with 359 teeth were identified. Four observers assessed the 
  relationship between the apex of tooth root and the maxillary sinus per 
  tooth on PA radiographs, OPG and CBCT images using the following 
  classification: root tip is in the sinus (class 1), root tip is against 
  the sinus wall (class 2) and root tip is not in the sinus (class 3).</p>
				</sec>
				<sec sec-type="results">
					<title>Results</title>
					<p>Overall correlation between OPG and CBCT images scores was 50%, 26% and 56.1% 
  for class 1, class 2 and class 3, respectively (Cohen's kappa [weighted] 
  = 0.1). Overall correlation between PA radiographs and CBCT images was 
  75.8%, 15.8% and 56.9% for class 1, class 2 and class 3, respectively 
  (Cohen's kappa [weighted] = 0.24). In both the OPG images and the PA 
  radiographs datasets, class 1 correlation was most frequently observed 
  with the first and second molars.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec sec-type="conclusions">
					<title>Conclusions</title>
					<p>The results demonstrated that both periapical radiographs and 
  orthopantomograms are not reliable in determination of exact 
  relationship between the apex of tooth root and the maxillary sinus 
  floor. Periapical radiography is slightly more reliable than 
  orthopantomography in determining this relationship.</p>
				</sec>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group>
				<kwd>dental radiography</kwd>
				<kwd>cone-beam computed tomography</kwd>
				<kwd>orthopantomography</kwd>
				<kwd>tooth root</kwd>
				<kwd>maxillary sinus.</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
<p>Exact assessment of the relationship between roots of maxillary premolars and 
molars and inferior wall of the maxillary sinus is essential in oral and maxillofacial 
pathology diagnosis. There are namely many important clinical implications for protrusion 
of roots in the maxillary sinus. For example, tooth extraction or endodontic surgery 
can lead to the formation of an oroantral fistula or oroantral communication in 
a case of presenting tooth root protrusion in the maxillary sinus [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>]. 
Furthermore, the maxillary sinus has been found to be the most significant pathway 
of periapical infection spreading for maxillary first and second premolars [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2-5</xref>]. 
In addition, increased pneumatization of the maxillary sinus and decreased alveolar 
bone thickness can often be observed after extraction of premolars and molars, which 
complicates implant placement [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>]. Spread of periapical infection 
from maxillary molars to surrounding structures was previously demonstrated on computed 
tomography (CT) images [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2</xref>]. The influence of root protrusion in 
the maxillary sinus floor may evoke tooth roots resorption or tipping during orthodontic 
treatment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">9</xref>].</p>
<p>The maxillary tooth root and sinus relationship can be assessed using different 
radiographic techniques. Conventional radiographs used in dental clinics include 
mainly intraoral periapical (PA) radiographs and to a lesser extent orthopantomograms 
(OPG). Virtually every radiographic examination in the dental clinic starts with 
a PA radiograph. In contrast, it has been shown in surveys, that up to 95% of dentists 
refer their patients solely for an OPG scan before implant placement with only a 
relatively small number of referrals for a CT scan [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">11</xref>]. It 
is interesting to know, that several studies assessed the vertical and horizontal 
relationship between the tooth root apex and the inferior wall of the maxillary 
sinus using CT diagnostic method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12-16</xref>]. It was concluded that 
CT is more accurate than OPG in assessing the tooth root and sinus relationship 
[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>]. Anyhow, two-dimensional radiographs suffer from superimposition 
artifacts inherent to the scan method frequently resulting in overprojection of 
maxillary teeth roots onto the sinus floor. Authors of two studies correlating CT 
scans and OPG images findings confirmed that OPG alone is unreliable in assessing 
the relationship between the teeth roots and the maxillary sinus [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17-18</xref>]. 
Similarly the reliability of PA radiographs in detection of root penetration in 
the maxillary sinus also needs further investigations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>]. Otherwise, 
cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scanning technology, which has been in wide 
use in dentistry for the last decade, is advantageous over traditional CT scanning 
technology since it provides comparable images at reduced dose and cost [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>]. 
CBCT proved to be a reliable technique for visualizing anatomical structures in 
the maxillofacial region and for assessing the relationship of teeth roots to adjacent 
structures including the maxillary sinus [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">22-25</xref>].</p>
<p>The purpose of the present study was to investigate the reliability of both periapical 
radiographs and orthopantograms for exact detection of tooth root protrusion in 
the maxillary sinus by correlating the results with cone beam computed tomography 
as a reference &quot;gold standard&quot;.</p>
		</sec>
	<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
			<title>MATERIAL AND METHODS</title>
<p><bold>Data collection</bold></p>
<p>In this retrospective study the database of patients scanned with CBCT at the 
Department of Oral Radiology, University of Amsterdam was examined. The initial 
selection criteria were: patients older than 18 years and the presence of one or 
multiple posterior maxillary teeth with a fully visible inferior maxillary sinus 
wall. Initial screening with these criteria resulted in the inclusion of 1400 CBCT 
patient&#39;s images. The images were made with the NewTom 3G CBCT system (QR SLR, Verona, 
Italy) using the 9&#39;&#39; field of view (FoV) selection and 110 kVp and 8 mA. Subsequently, 
the patients&#39; records database was searched for matching conventional OPG images 
and intraoral PA radiaographs. Only those OPG images and PA radiographs were included 
in the study, where the relationship of teeth roots to the maxillary sinus floor 
could be adequately assessed. First, a dataset of matching OPG images of 101 patients 
(33 males and 68 females; aged 18 to 77 years; mean age = 49 years) with 628 maxillary 
premolars and molars was obtained. A second dataset of matching PA radiographs of 
93 patients (37 males and 56 females; aged 23 to 74 years; mean age = 51 years) 
with 359 maxillary premolars and molars was also identified and included in this 
study. The OPG images were performed using the Cranex Tome unit (Soredex, Tuusula, 
Finland) and the PA radiographs using a fixed intraoral unit (Heliodent MD, Siemens, 
Erlangen, Germany) and size 2 phosphor-plate films (Digora, Tuusula, Finland).</p>
<p><bold>Data analysis</bold></p>
<p>Four dentists following a master course in maxillofacial radiology at the Department 
of Oral Radiology were recruited as observers for this study. The datasets were 
collected by one investigator (maxillofacial radiologist, Department of Oral Radiology, 
University of Amsterdam) who did not participate in the observations. The observers 
were blinded to the patients&#39; biographic data including name, gender and age. The 
observers were calibrated by training them in the radiographic features for identifying 
the relationship of the teeth roots to the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus. 
The identifying radiographic feature in all imaging modalities was to assess whether 
the apical root tip of right and left first and second premolars, first, second 
and third molars is over (in), against (doubtful) or under (out) the white line 
depicting the inferior border of the maxillary sinus. The observers assessed first 
the conventional PA radiographs and OPG and then the CBCT images. All measurements 
were made with consensus among the four observers. Radiographs were displayed under 
standardized lightening conditions of reduced dim light on a 21-inch flat-panel 
screen (resolution 1680 x 1050, Philips Brilliance, Amsterdam, Netherlands). The 
PA radiographs and OPG images were displayed using Emago imaging software (v.5.4, 
Amsterdam, Netherlands) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). The CBCT images datasets were 
reviewed using the NewTom 3G software (v.2.17, Verona, Italy). Multiplanar reformatted 
reconstructions in the axial, coronal and sagittal planes were created and the relationship 
of the teeth root tip to the maxillary floor was assessed in all three reconstruction 
planes on all slices (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). Voxel size in CBCT images were 
0.3 mm with no inter-slice thickness (contiguous dataset). Image manipulation by 
changing contrast/brightness levels, sharpness filter and magnification was permitted 
to enhance visibility.</p>
			<fig id="fig1">
				<label>Figure 1</label>
				<caption>
					<p>An example of no protrusion of tooth #27 palatal root tip (arrow) in the maxillary 
		sinus according to cone beam computed tomography scans assessment: A = axial 
		slice; B = coronal slice; C = sagittal slice. Tooth root #27 overprojection 
		onto the maxillary sinus floor using orthopantomogram images (D) and periapical 
		radiographs (E).</p>
				</caption>
				<graphic xlink:href="jomr-01-e6-g001.jpg"/>
			</fig>
			<fig id="fig2">
				<label>Figure 2</label>
				<caption>
					<p>An example of tooth #26 palatal root protrusion in the maxillary sinus according 
		to cone beam computed tomography scans multiplanar reformatted images: A 
		= axial slice; B = sagittal slice; C = coronal slice.</p>
				</caption>
				<graphic xlink:href="jomr-01-e6-g002.jpg"/>
			</fig>
<p>A single score was obtained for each tooth whether single or multirooted for 
each imaging technique with the following classification: at least one root tip 
is in the sinus (class 1); at least one root tip is against the sinus wall (class 
2) and all roots tips are not in the sinus (class 3).</p>
<p><bold>Statistical analysis</bold></p>
<p>All measurements were entered and analyzed using SPSS software (v.16, SPSS Benelux, 
Gorinchem, Netherlands). A two-sided Chi square test and Cohen&#39;s weighted kappa 
coefficient were used to correlate the OPG images and PA radiographs measurements 
with the CBCT assessment scores. A univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was also 
conducted to assess any possible correlation between the proportion of presence 
of root in the sinus and patients&#39; age and sex. Differences were considered as statistically 
significant when P values were &lt; 0.05.</p>

		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results">
			<title>RESULTS</title>
<p>In the assessment of 628 teeth included in the OPG images dataset (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 
1</xref>), sixty eighth teeth (10.8%) were identified as class 1, 50 (8%) class 2 and 
510 (81.2%) class 3. Within the 359 teeth included in the PA radiographs dataset 
(<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>), sixty six teeth (18.4%) were identified as class 1, 
19 (5.3%) class 2 and 266 (76.3%) class 3. <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 1</xref> shows the classifications, 
proportions, sensitivity, specificity and Cohen&#39;s weighted kappa coefficient results 
between (OPG) images and CBCT scans for protrusion of roots in the maxillary sinus 
per tooth. Overall correlation between OPG and CBCT assessments scores independently 
of tooth type was 50%, 26% and 56.1% for class 1, class 2 and class 3, respectively 
(Cohen&#39;s kappa [weighted] = 0.1). Overall correlation between PA radiography and 
CBCT assessments scores (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>) independently of tooth type 
was 75.8%, 15.8% and 56.9% for class 1, class 2 and class 3, respectively (Cohen&#39;s 
kappa [weighted] = 0.24). There was no statistically significant correlation between 
the proportion of root protrusion in the maxillary sinus and age (P = 0.32) or sex 
(P = 0.40) in both datasets.</p>
			<table-wrap id="T1" position="float">
				<label>Table 1</label>
				<caption>
			  <p>Classification<sup>a</sup> of maxillary premolars and molars roots relationship to the maxillary sinus floor according to cone beam computed tomography scans and orthopantomogram images assessment results</p>
				</caption>
				<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
  <thead>
  <tr> <th  rowspan="2"> Maxillary
    <break />
    teeth </th> <th  rowspan="2"> N </th> <th  colspan="3"> Cone beam computed
    <break />
    tomography
    (n [%])<hr/> </th> <th  colspan="3"> Orthopantomography
    <break />
    (n [%])<hr/> </th> <th  rowspan="2"> True
    <break />
    positive </th> <th  rowspan="2"> True
    <break />
    negative </th> <th  rowspan="2"> False
    <break />
    positive </th> <th  rowspan="2"> False
    <break />
    negative </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Sensitivity </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Specificity </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Kappa
    <break />
    coefficient </th> </tr>
  <tr> <th> Class 1 </th> <th> Class 2 </th> <th> Class 3 </th> <th> Class 1 </th> <th> Class 2 </th> <th> Class 3 </th> </tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
  <tr>
    <td> First <break />
      premolar </td>
    <td align="center"> 148 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 1 (0.7) </td>
    <td align="center"> 147 (99.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 32 (21.6) </td>
    <td align="center"> 24 (16.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 92 (62.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 62.2 </td>
    <td align="center"> 21.8 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 74 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.01 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Second<break />
      premolar </td>
    <td align="center"> 146 </td>
    <td align="center"> 2 (1.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 6 (4.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 138 (94.5) </td>
    <td align="center"> 40 (27.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 21 (14.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 85 (58.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 100 </td>
    <td align="center"> 60 </td>
    <td align="center"> 24.6 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 100 </td>
    <td align="center"> 70 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.05 </td>
  </tr>
    <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> First<break />
      molar </td>
    <td align="center"> 144 </td>
    <td align="center"> 34 (23.6) </td>
    <td align="center"> 17 (11.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 93 (64.6) </td>
    <td align="center"> 51 (35.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 25 (17.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 68 (47.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 41.2 </td>
    <td align="center"> 47.3 </td>
    <td align="center"> 30.1 </td>
    <td align="center"> 52.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 45 </td>
    <td align="center"> 61 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.01 </td>
  </tr>
    <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Second<break />
      molar </td>
    <td align="center"> 145 </td>
    <td align="center"> 26 (17.9) </td>
    <td align="center"> 25 (17.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 94 (64.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 51 (35.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 29 (20) </td>
    <td align="center"> 65 (44.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 57.7 </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 </td>
    <td align="center"> 33 </td>
    <td align="center"> 26.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 68 </td>
    <td align="center"> 60 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.16 </td>
  </tr>
    <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Third<break />
      molar </td>
    <td align="center"> 45 </td>
    <td align="center"> 6 (13.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 1 (2.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 38 (84.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 13 (28.9) </td>
    <td align="center"> 9 (20) </td>
    <td align="center"> 23 (51.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 </td>
    <td align="center"> 51.1 </td>
    <td align="center"> 26.3 </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 </td>
    <td align="center"> 66 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.11 </td>
  </tr>
    <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Total<break />
      (n [%]) </td>
    <td align="center"> 628 (100) </td>
    <td align="center"> 68 (10.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 (8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 510 (81.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 187 (29.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 108 (17.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 333 (53) </td>
    <td  colspan="6" align="center"></td>
    <td align="center"> 0.1 </td>
  </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>

				<table-wrap-foot>
					<fn>
					<p><sup>a</sup>Class 1 = at least one root tip is in the sinus; Class 2 = at least one root tip is against the sinus wall; Class 3 = all roots tips are not in the sinus.</p>
				  </fn>
			  </table-wrap-foot>
			</table-wrap>
			
			
			<table-wrap id="T2" position="float">
				<label>Table 2</label>
				<caption>
			  <p>Classification<sup>a</sup> of maxillary premolars and molars roots relationship to the maxillary sinus floor according to cone beam computed tomography scans and periapical radiographs assessment results</p>
				</caption>
				<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
  <thead>
  <tr> <th  rowspan="2"> Maxillary<break />
teeth </th> <th  rowspan="2"> N </th> <th  colspan="3"> Cone beam computed<break />
    tomography 
    (n [%])<hr/> </th> <th  colspan="3"> Periapical radiography<break />
    (n [%])<hr/> </th> <th  rowspan="2"> True<break />
    positive </th> <th  rowspan="2"> True<break />
    negative </th> <th  rowspan="2"> False<break />
    positive </th> <th  rowspan="2"> False <break />
    negative </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Sensitivity </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Specificity </th> <th  rowspan="2"> Kappa<break />
    coefficient </th> </tr>
  <tr> <th> Class 1 </th> <th> Class 2 </th> <th> Class 3 </th> <th> Class 1 </th> <th> Class 2 </th> <th> Class 3 </th> </tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
  <tr>
    <td> First<break />
      premolar </td>
    <td align="center"> 90 </td>
    <td align="center"> 3 (3.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 1 (1.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 86 (95.6) </td>
    <td align="center"> 8 (8.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 7 (7.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 75 (83.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 84.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 8.1 </td>
    <td align="center"> 66.7 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0 </td>
    <td align="center"> 91 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.05 </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Second<break />
      premolar </td>
    <td align="center"> 88 </td>
    <td align="center"> 8 (9.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 8 (9.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 72 (81.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 17 (19.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 19 (21.6) </td>
    <td align="center"> 52 (59.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 25 </td>
    <td align="center"> 63.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 16.7 </td>
    <td align="center"> 50 </td>
    <td align="center"> 59 </td>
    <td align="center"> 79 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.12 </td>
  </tr>
      <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> First<break />
      molar </td>
    <td align="center"> 90 </td>
    <td align="center"> 28 (31.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 6 (6.7) </td>
    <td align="center"> 56 (62.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 71 (78.9) </td>
    <td align="center"> 2 (2.2) </td>
    <td align="center"> 17 (18.9) </td>
    <td align="center"> 92.9 </td>
    <td align="center"> 28.6 </td>
    <td align="center"> 69.6 </td>
    <td align="center"> 3.6 </td>
    <td align="center"> 96 </td>
    <td align="center"> 29 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.16 </td>
  </tr>
      <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Second<break />
      molar </td>
    <td align="center"> 83 </td>
    <td align="center"> 27 (32.5) </td>
    <td align="center"> 4 (4.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 52 (62.7) </td>
    <td align="center"> 59 (71.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 4 (4.8) </td>
    <td align="center"> 20 (24.1) </td>
    <td align="center"> 81.5 </td>
    <td align="center"> 32.7 </td>
    <td align="center"> 63.5 </td>
    <td align="center"> 11.1 </td>
    <td align="center"> 88 </td>
    <td align="center"> 33 </td>
    <td align="center"> 0.13 </td>
  </tr>
    <tr>
<td colspan="15"><hr/></td>
</tr>
  <tr>
    <td> Total<break />
      (n [%]) </td>
    <td align="center"> 359 (100) </td>
    <td align="center"> 66 (18.4) </td>
    <td align="center"> 19 (5.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 266 (76.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 155 (44.3) </td>
    <td align="center"> 32 (8.9) </td>
    <td align="center"> 164 (46.8) </td>
    <td  colspan="6" align="center"></td>
    <td align="center"> 0.24 </td>
  </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
				<table-wrap-foot>
					<fn>
					<p><sup>a</sup>Class 1 = at least one root tip is in the sinus; Class 2 = at least one root tip is against the sinus wall; Class 3 = all roots tips are not in the sinus.</p>
				  </fn>
			  </table-wrap-foot>
			</table-wrap>
<p>In both PA radiographs and OPG images datasets, class 1 relationship in which 
the root penetrated the sinus wall was most frequently observed with the first and 
second molars (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Tables 1 and 2</xref>). Class 2 relationship in which 
the root was against the sinus wall, was observed in a relatively small number of 
cases and was also most frequently associated with the first and second molars.  
The majority of the other cases were identified as class 3 in which there were no 
contact between the root and the sinus floor and this was most frequently observed 
with the first premolar (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Tables 1 and 2</xref>).</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="discussion">
		  <title>DISCUSSION</title>
<p>The present investigation was conducted to assess the reliability of PA and OPG 
radiographs in detection of tooth root protrusion of the maxillary sinus inferior 
wall. The correlation results with CBCT measurements, per tooth and overall, demonstrated 
low reliability of both OPG scans and PA radiographs for detection of tooth root 
protrusion (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Tables 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>). Due to the super-imposition of anatomical 
structures on conventional two-dimensional radiographs, the roots of the premolars and molars were overprojected on the wall 
of the maxillary sinus. There was better correlation between CBCT scans and PA radiographs 
scores than between CBCT scans and OPG images scores. This may be due to the use 
of paralleling technique for intraoral radiographs with the aid of a film holder 
and a beam indicating device that both the film and the long axis of the root were 
parallel to each other with the x-ray beam passing perpendicularly to both root 
and film [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>]. It is noteworthy that a standardized paralleling 
technique is routinely used in our institute unless a contraindication favors the 
use of the bisecting angle technique instead. Therefore, the results could differ 
somewhat from private dental clinics.</p>
<p>The present study results revealed, independently on applied radiographic method, 
that the maxillary first premolar tooth did not perforate the sinus wall in most 
cases while first and second molars were the most frequent teeth to penetrate the 
maxillary sinus wall (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Tables 1 and 2</xref>). This is in agreement with 
previous findings [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>]. There were many false positives in 
both techniques. The largest number of false positives was with the maxillary second 
molar (33%) for OPG while it was the first molar (69.6%) for PA. It was previously 
found that the least thickness of the sinus floor is at the maxillary second molar 
area and that the average distance of the root apex from the sinus floor was the 
longest in the first premolar area and shortest in the second molar area [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>].</p>
<p>Several classifications for the relationship of the teeth to the maxillary sinus 
floor were previously suggested. Freisfeld et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>] suggested 
a classification applicable for both panoramic images and CT scans based on the 
first molar. Kwak et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>] suggested an elaborate classification 
for the vertical relationship of the tooth root apex on CT scans and the results 
were compared to histological findings. They found that the inferior wall of the 
sinus was located above the level connecting the buccal and lingual roots apices 
in the first and second molars region in 54.5% and 52.4% of cases respectively. 
Sharan et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>] extended Freisfeld&#39;s et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>] 
classification and made this applicable to both OPG images and CT scans. The classification 
used in present study was a reduced version of that of Sharan et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>] 
classification. Sharan et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>] found that in 80 subjects 
with 422 maxillary roots, there was high agreement of 86% to 96% between CT scans 
and OPG images for roots that did not project on the sinus floor. While only 39% 
of the roots that projected on the sinus cavity in OPG images showed protrusion 
into the sinus on CT scans. Their results also demonstrate that OPG images cannot 
provide the clinician with sufficient information about the true relationship between 
the sinus floor and root tips when the root is projected on the sinus. The results 
of this study corroborate those findings and additionally suggest that PA radiography 
could be a more reliable technique than OPG in detecting root protrusion in the 
sinus.</p>
<p>Present study was limited that two separate databases where employed to assess 
the accuracy of OPG and PA radiography. A common database with a sufficient sample 
size for statistical analysis in which the patient has matching CBCT, OPG and PA 
radiographs could not be identified. CBCT was used in this study as a &quot;gold standard&quot; 
since the tomographic nature and inherently high image contrast of this imaging 
modality compared to conventional projection radiography permits better assessment 
of the relationship between the root apex and the sinus wall. However, CBCT image 
artifacts and increased noise levels might occasionally mask the root and the sinus 
wall rendering precise assessment difficult. The reliably of the &quot;reference standard&quot; 
is thus limited by the spatial resolution and contrast of the system used. Additionally, 
this study focused mainly on the vertical relation of the root to the maxillary 
sinus and the horizontal relationship was not assessed.</p>
	</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
<p>The results of present study demonstrated that both periapical radiographs 
and orthopantomograms were not reliable in determination of exact relationship between 
the apex of tooth root and the maxillary sinus floor. Periapical radiographs were 
slightly more reliable than orthopantomograms in determining this relationship.</p>

		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ack>
			<sec sec-type="acknowledgments and disclosure statements">
				<title>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS</title>
<p>The author would like to thank Dr. Jamshed Tairie, Department of Oral 
Radiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), for his support with 
data analysis and Dr. Hans Verheij, Department of Oral Radiology, Academic Centre 
for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), for his support with the statistical analysis.</p>
<p>The author declares that there is no conflict of interest of any kind in this 
study.</p>
		 </sec>
		</ack>
		<ref-list>
		<title>REFERENCES</title>
<ref id="B1"><label>1</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Harrison</surname>
							<given-names>DF</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Oro-antral fistula. Br J Clin Pract. 1961 
Feb;15:169-74.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">13711812</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2"><label>2</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Obayashi</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Goto</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Izumi</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Naitoh</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kurita</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Shimozato</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Spread of odontogenic infection originating in the maxillary 
teeth: computerized tomographic assessment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral 
Radiol Endod. 2004 Aug;98(2):223-31.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15316549</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.05.014</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3"><label>3</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Yoshiura</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ban</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Hijiya</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Yuasa</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Miwa</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Tabata</surname>
							<given-names>O</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Araki</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Tanaka</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Yonetsu</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Analysis of maxillary sinusitis 
using computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1993 May;22(2):86-92.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8375560itle</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4"><label>4</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Kretzschmar</surname>
							<given-names>DP</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Kretzschmar JL. Rhinosinusitis: review 
from a dental perspective. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 
Aug;96(2):128-35. Review.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12931083</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S1079-2104(03)00306-8</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5"><label>5</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Kamijyo</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Clinical osteology. In: Kamijyo T, editor. 
Oral anatomy. Vol 1: osteology. Tokyo: Anatom: 1997; p. 207–216.</source>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6"><label>6</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Kircos</surname>
							<given-names>LT</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Misch</surname>
							<given-names>CE</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Diagnostic imaging and techniques. 
In: Misch CE, editor. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby: 
1999; p. 76-194.</source>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7"><label>7</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Wehrbein</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Diedrich</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>[Progressive pneumatization 
of the basal maxillary sinus after extraction and space closure]. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 
1992 Apr;53(2):77-83. German.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1577348</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8"><label>8</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Daimaruya</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Takahashi</surname>
							<given-names>I</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Nagasaka</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Umemori</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Sugawara</surname>
							<given-names>J</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Mitani</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Effects of maxillary molar intrusion on the nasal floor and tooth root 
using the skeletal anchorage system in dogs. Angle Orthod. 2003 Apr;73(2):158-66. 
</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12725372</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9"><label>9</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Wehrbein</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Bauer</surname>
							<given-names>W</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Wessing</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Diedrich</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>[The effect 
of the maxillary sinus floor on orthodontic tooth movement]. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 
1990 Dec;51(6):345-51. German.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">2286348</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10"><label>10</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Sakakura</surname>
							<given-names>CE</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Morais</surname>
							<given-names>JA</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Loffredo</surname>
							<given-names>LC</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Scaf</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>
A survey of radiographic prescription in dental implant assessment. Dentomaxillofac 
Radiol. 2003 Nov;32(6):397-400.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15070843</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1259/dmfr/20681066</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11"><label>11</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Beason</surname>
							<given-names>RC</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Brooks</surname>
							<given-names>SL</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Preoperative implant site assessment 
in southeast Michigan. J Dent Res 2001;80:136.</source>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12"><label>12</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Bertrand</surname>
							<given-names>B</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Rombaux</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Eloy</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Reychler</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Sinusitis 
of dental origin. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg. 1997;51(4):315-22. Review.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9444378</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13"><label>13</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Moriguchi</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kuroki</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kanda</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Computed 
tomography of maxillofacial infection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1991 Aug;20(3):147-51. 
</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1807998</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14"><label>14</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Obayashi</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Goto</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Izumi</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Naitoh</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kurita</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Shimozato</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ariji</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Roots of the maxillary first and second molars in horizontal 
relation to alveolar cortical plates and maxillary sinus: computed tomography assessment 
for infection spread. Clin Oral Investig. 2006 Mar;10(1):35-41. Epub 2005 Dec 15. 
</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16362431</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00784-005-0020-5</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15"><label>15</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Eberhardt</surname>
							<given-names>JA</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Torabinejad</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Christiansen</surname>
							<given-names>EL</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>A computed 
tomographic study of the distances between the maxillary sinus floor and the apices 
of the maxillary posterior teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992 Mar;73(3):345-6. 
</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1545967</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16"><label>16</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Kwak</surname>
							<given-names>HH</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Park</surname>
							<given-names>HD</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Yoon</surname>
							<given-names>HR</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kang</surname>
							<given-names>MK</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Koh</surname>
							<given-names>KS</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kim</surname>
							<given-names>HJ</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>
Topographic anatomy of the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus in Koreans. Int 
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004 Jun;33(4):382-8.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15145042</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijom.2003.10.012</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17"><label>17</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Bouquet</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Coudert</surname>
							<given-names>JL</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Bourgeois</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Mazoyer</surname>
							<given-names>JF</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Bossard</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Contributions of reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography in 
the localization of third molars relative to the maxillary sinus. Oral Surg Oral 
Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004 Sep;98(3):342-7.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15356474</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.02.082</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18"><label>18</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Sharan</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Madjar</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Correlation between maxillary 
sinus floor topography and related root position of posterior teeth using panoramic 
and cross-sectional computed tomography imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 
Oral Radiol Endod. 2006 Sep;102(3):375-81. Epub 2006 Jun 8.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16920546</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.09.031</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19"><label>19</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Low</surname>
							<given-names>KM</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Dula</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Bürgin</surname>
							<given-names>W</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>von Arx</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Comparison of 
periapical radiography and limited cone-beam tomography in posterior maxillary teeth 
referred for apical surgery. J Endod. 2008 May;34(5):557-62.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18436034</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.joen.2008.02.022</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20"><label>20</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Loubele</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Bogaerts</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Van Dijck</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Pauwels</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Vanheusden</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Suetens</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Marchal</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Sanderink</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Jacobs</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Comparison between effective radiation 
dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications. Eur J Radiol. 
2009 Sep;71(3):461-8. Epub 2008 Jul 18.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18639404</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.06.002</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21"><label>21</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Tsiklakis</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Donta</surname>
							<given-names>C</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Gavala</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Karayianni</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kamenopoulou</surname>
							<given-names>V</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Hourdakis</surname>
							<given-names>CJ</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam 
CT. Eur J Radiol. 2005 Dec;56(3):413-7. Epub 2005 Jun 22.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15978765</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.05.011</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22"><label>22</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Tantanapornkul</surname>
							<given-names>W</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Okouchi</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Fujiwara</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Yamashiro</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Maruoka</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ohbayashi</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Kurabayashi</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>A comparative study of cone-beam computed 
tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the topographic relationship 
between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral 
Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Feb;103(2):253-9. Epub 2006 Sep 1.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17234544</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.06.060</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23"><label>23</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Angelopoulos</surname>
							<given-names>C</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Thomas</surname>
							<given-names>SL</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Hechler</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Parissis</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Hlavacek</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed 
tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical 
dental implant assessment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Oct;66(10):2130-5. Erratum 
in: J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Dec;66(12):2657.. Thomas, Stephen [corrected to 
Thomas, Steven L]; Hechler, Stephen [corrected to Hechler, Steven].</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18848113</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.021</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24"><label>24</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Neugebauer</surname>
							<given-names>J</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Shirani</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Mischkowski</surname>
							<given-names>RA</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Ritter</surname>
							<given-names>L</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Scheer</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Keeve</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Zöller</surname>
							<given-names>JE</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Comparison of cone-beam volumetric imaging and combined 
plain radiographs for localization of the mandibular canal before removal of impacted 
lower third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008 May;105(5):633-42; 
discussion 643. Epub 2008 Mar 4.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18299225</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.08.041</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25"><label>25</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Sawamura</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Minowa</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Nakamura</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Impacted teeth 
in the maxilla: usefulness of 3D Dental-CT for preoperative evaluation. Eur J Radiol. 
2003 Sep;47(3):221-6.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12927666</pub-id> 
<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00168-7</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26"><label>26</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>White</surname>
							<given-names>SC</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Pharoah</surname>
							<given-names>MJ</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Intraoral radiography. In: White 
SC, Pharoah MJ, editors. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 5th ed. 
St. Louis: Mosby: 2004; p. 77-90.</source>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27"><label>27</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Mustian</surname>
							<given-names>WF</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The floor of the maxillary sinus and its 
dental and nasal relation. J Am Dent Assoc 1933: 20: 2175–2187.</source>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28"><label>28</label>
		<element-citation>
			<person-group person-group-type="author">
				<name>
						<surname>Freisfeld</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Drescher</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Schellmann</surname>
							<given-names>B</given-names>
                            </name><name>
                            <surname>Schüller</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>
[The maxillary sixth-year molar and its relation to the maxillary sinus. A comparative 
study between the panoramic tomogram and the computed tomogram]. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 
1993 Oct;54(5):179-86. German.</source>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8244214</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
  </ref-list>
</back>
</article>
