Osteomyelitis, osteoradionecrosis, or medication‐related osteonecrosis of the jaws? Can CBCT enhance radiographic diagnosis?

• Published in: Oral diseases Vol. 27; no. 2; pp. 312 - 319
• Main Authors: Gaêta‐Araujo, Hugo, Vanderhaeghen, Olivier, Vasconcelos, Karla de Faria, Coucke, Wim, Coropciuc, Ruxandra, Politis, Constantinus, Jacobs, Reinhilde
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Denmark Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.03.2021
• Subjects: Computed tomography; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Lesions; Mandible; Osteomyelitis; Osteomyelitis - diagnostic imaging; Osteonecrosis; Osteonecrosis - chemically induced; Osteonecrosis - diagnostic imaging; Osteoradionecrosis; Osteoradionecrosis - diagnostic imaging; panoramic; Radiography; Radiography, Panoramic; Spiral Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; tomography; X‐ray computed; osteomyelitis; tomography; panoramic; osteonecrosis; osteoradionecrosis; radiography; X-ray computed
• ISSN: 1354-523X; 1601-0825; 1601-0825
• DOI: 10.1111/odi.13534

Objective To attempt defining differential radiographic diagnostic characteristics for osteonecrotic lesions using 2D as opposed to 3D images. Materials and Methods This was a cross‐sectional study. Subjects presenting mandibular osteonecrotic lesions (osteomyelitis, osteoradionecrosis, and medication‐related osteonecrosis of the jaws) were selected and compared to a group of age‐ and gender‐matched controls, all having both cone‐beam computed tomographic images (CBCT) and panoramic radiographs (PANO). Both imaging modalities (predictor variables) were evaluated by two radiologists that scored lesion presence, eight additional radiological features, and a composite severity index (outcome variables). For each pathologic condition, characteristic features were assessed in PANO and CBCT by the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test. Regression tree analysis revealed the predictive value of PANO and CBCT (α = 5%). Results Overall, the predictive value of PANO reached 74%, while for CBCT it became 90%. Regarding the composite severity index, CBCT enabled to detect more subtle lesions. Also, CBCT imaging allowed showing more distinct radiographic diagnostic features as compared to PANO imaging, more specifically when distinguishing osteomyelitis from both other lesions. Conclusions Cone‐beam computed tomography enabled showing more differences in radiological features between distinct osteonecrosis disease entities. CBCT imaging might be a better contributor for the detection of early lesions and to monitor further pathological developments in the mandible.