Ultrasound Imaging versus Radiographs in Differentiating Periapical Lesions: A Systematic Review

• Main Authors: Shankargouda Patil, Ahmed Alkahtani, Shilpa Bhandi, Mohammed Mashyakhy, Mario Alvarez, Riyadh Alroomy, Ali Hendi, Saranya Varadarajan, Rodolfo Reda, A. Thirumal Raj, Luca Testarelli
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2021-07-01
• Series: Diagnostics
• Subjects: imaging; ultrasound; radiograph; periapical; lesions; diagnosis
• Online Access: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/11/7/1208

Background: Ultrasonography is a non-invasive method of diagnosing periapical lesions while radiologic methods are more common. Periapical lesions due to endodontic infection are one of the most common causes of periapical radiolucency that need to be distinguished to help determine the course of treatment. This review aimed to examine the accuracy of ultrasound and compare it to radiographs in distinguishing these lesions in vivo. Methods: This review process followed the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science) was conducted without any restrictions on time. Articles available in English were included. The selection was done according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. Results: The search provided a total of 87 articles, out of which, five were selected for the final review. In all the studies, ultrasound had higher accuracy in distinguishing periapical lesions. All the studies indicated a risk of bias, especially in patient selection. Conclusion: Within limitations, the study indicates that ultrasound is a better diagnostic tool to distinguish periapical lesions compared to radiographs but further studies with well-designed, rigorous protocols and low risk of bias are needed to provide stronger evidence.