CBCT of Swedish children and adolescents at an oral and maxillofacial radiology department. A survey of requests and indications. (2nd January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hajem, Samara; Brogårdh-Roth, Susanne; Nilsson, Mats; Hellén-Halme, Kristina
• Is Part Of: Acta odontologica Scandinavica. Volume 78:Number 1(2020)
• Page Start: 38
• Page End: 44
• Publication Date: 2020-01-02
• Subjects: Children -- cone-beam computed tomography -- dental radiography; Dentistry -- Periodicals; 617.6005
• DOI: 10.1080/00016357.2019.1645879
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0001-6357

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: This retrospective study investigated requests and indications for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in children and adolescents over a 3-year period at one oral and maxillofacial radiology department. Specific aims were to determine what technical settings were used, which caregivers write the referrals, and how often and for what reasons re-exposure was necessary. Materials and methods: Patients <19 years of age who had been referred to the department and undergone a CBCT scan during 2015–2017 were included in the study. Results: CBCT were made in 617 of the 3847 eligible referrals. The most common referral was from general practice dentists (GPD) (43%). Mean age of the patients was 12.5 years (range: 6–18). Nineteen different types of requests were identified. The most common request was assessment of an ectopic canine with a question about potential resorption of adjacent teeth (38.6%). Forty (6.5%) of the CBCT needed to be re-taken due to patient motion artefacts. Conclusions: The most common request and indication for CBCT examination of children and young adults were to assess an ectopic canine and determine the presence of resorption of adjacent teeth. Referrals from GPDs were the most frequent and the largest age group was the 11- to 15-year olds. The reason for re-exposures was motion artefacts. High scanning speed to reduce motion artefacts and a half rotation (180°) to reduce the radiation dose to the patient should be preferred. The need for continuous work with quality and systematic monitoring of radiographic procedures at any radiology department should be given high priority.