• Ignazio Pandolfo
  • Silvio Mazziotti


While clinical evaluation plays a fundamental role in the diagnosis and the evaluation of the extension of the dental caries, it is clear that radiological examination, in a considerable percentage of cases, mainly plays a complementary role. Nevertheless, orthopantomography is sufficient to distinguish between the damage of the enamel and the dentine’s one and between the latter and a possible involvement of the pulp chamber.


Dental Pulp Carious Lesion Radiolucent Line Pulp Chamber Secondary Caries 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Suggested Reading

  1. Akarslan ZZ (2009) Author’s reply to the Letter to the Editor entitled “Gold standard for the comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of panoramic images for approximal caries detection” published in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2009;38:245). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38(7):493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akarslan ZZ, Akdevelioğlu M, Güngör K, Erten H (2008) A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of bitewing, periapical, unfiltered and filtered digital panoramic images for approximal caries detection in posterior teeth. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37(8):458–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkaya N, Kansu O, Kansu H, Cagirankaya LB, Arslan U (2006) Comparing the accuracy of panoramic and intraoral radiography in the diagnosis of proximal caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35(3):170–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barr JH, Stephen RG (1980) Dental radiology. Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  5. Bin-Shuwaish M, Dennison JB, Yaman P, Neiva G (2008) Estimation of clinical axial extension of class II caries lesions with ultraspeed and digital radiographs: an in-vivo study. Oper Dent 33(6):613–621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cantelmi P, Singer SR, Tamari K (2010) Dental caries in an impacted mandibular second molar: using cone beam computed tomography to explain inconsistent clinical and radiographic findings. Quintessence Int 41(8):627–630PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark HC, Curzon ME (2004) A prospective comparison between findings from a clinical examination and results of bitewing and panoramic radiographs for dental caries diagnosis in children. Eur J Paediatr Dent 5(4):203–209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Clifton TL, Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB (1998) Extraoral radiographic imaging of primary caries. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 27(4):193–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kamburoglu K, Kolsuz E, Murat S, Yüksel S, Ozen T (2012) Proximal caries detection accuracy using intraoral bitewing radiography, extraoral bitewing radiography and panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 41(6):450–459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ng MW, Chase I (2013) Early childhood caries: risk-based disease prevention and management. Dent Clin North Am 57(1):1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pitts NB (1993) Current methods and criteria for caries diagnosis in Europe. J Dent Educ 57:409PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Poyton HG (1980) Oral radiology. Williams & Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  13. Thylstrup A, Fejerskov O (1996) Textbook of clinical cariology. Munkgaard, CopenaghenGoogle Scholar
  14. Wenzel A (2009) Gold standard for the comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of panoramic images for approximal caries detection. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38(4):245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. White SC, Pharoah MJ (2000) Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. Mosby, St LouisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ignazio Pandolfo
    • 1
  • Silvio Mazziotti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiological SciencesUniversity of MessinaMessinaItaly

Personalised recommendations