LAUSR

Background/purpose Information regarding agreements between periapical radiograph (PA) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in detecting peri-implant defect is still scarce. The aim of this clinical study was to compare agreements between PA and CBCT in detecting peri-implant bone defect. Materials and methods This retrospective clinical study enrolled 32 patients with both PA and CBCT filmed right after implant placement. Four modalities were used for film reading: PA1 (original), PA2 (enhanced brightness/contrast), CBCT1 (selected axial and mesial-distal direction images) and CBCT2 (all data with software). 2 experienced and 2 inexperienced observers scored all films. Intra- and inter-observer agreements were estimated with Cohen's kappa coefficient. Categorized agreements were compared and differences among four modalities were calculated. Results Agreements of PA were better than CBCT when detecting peri-implant bone defects in inter-observer agreements (median kappa 0.471 vs. 0.192; p = 0.016). Moreover, agreements in experienced observers were better than inexperienced observers (median kappa 0.883 vs. 0.567; p < 0.001). There was significant difference among four modalities except for experienced observer 2 (p = 0.218). Conclusion Agreements of PA are better than CBCT when detecting peri-implant bone defects, especially for inter-observer agreements. Experienced observers are more consistent in assessment than inexperienced ones.