Evaluation of Pathologists (Histopathology) and Radiologists (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) Differentiating Radicular Cysts from Granulomas

Paul Rosenberg, Jared Frisbie, Jaehoon Lee, Kyung Lee, Herbert Frommer, Shailesh Kottal, Joan Phelan, Louis Lin, Gene Fisch

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: This study investigated the differentiation of radicular cysts from granulomas. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging was compared with the existing standard, biopsy and histopathology. Methods: Forty-five patients scheduled for an apicoectomy received a CBCT scan of the involved arch. Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists, working independently and using the same criteria, categorized the CBCT images as one of the following: cyst, likely cyst, likely granuloma, granuloma, or other. After apicoectomies, two oral pathologists, working independently and using the same criteria, diagnosed the surgical specimens as one of the following: radicular cyst, granuloma, or other. We examined the following: (1) interrater agreement between pathologists as to the biopsy diagnosis, (2) interrater agreement between radiologists as to the CBCT diagnosis, and (3) accuracy of radiologists' diagnostic assessments using histopathology as the standard. Results: Findings showed strong interrater reliability between pathologists (κ = 0.79, z = 5.46, p < 0.0001) and weak interrater reliability between radiologists (κ = 0.14, p = not significant). Accuracy (true-positives plus true-negatives) for the two radiologists was 51% and 63%. Conclusion: Under the conditions of this study, based on the inconsistency of the radiologists' reports as evidenced by statistical analyses, it was concluded that CBCT imaging is not a reliable diagnostic method for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas. Surgical biopsy and histopathological evaluation remain the standard procedure for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)423-428
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Endodontics
Volume36
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2010

Fingerprint

Radicular Cyst
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Granuloma
Apicoectomy
Biopsy
Cysts
Pathologists
Radiologists

Keywords

  • Cone beam computed tomography
  • differentiating lesions
  • granuloma
  • radicular cyst

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Evaluation of Pathologists (Histopathology) and Radiologists (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) Differentiating Radicular Cysts from Granulomas. / Rosenberg, Paul; Frisbie, Jared; Lee, Jaehoon; Lee, Kyung; Frommer, Herbert; Kottal, Shailesh; Phelan, Joan; Lin, Louis; Fisch, Gene.

In: Journal of Endodontics, Vol. 36, No. 3, 03.2010, p. 423-428.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rosenberg, Paul ; Frisbie, Jared ; Lee, Jaehoon ; Lee, Kyung ; Frommer, Herbert ; Kottal, Shailesh ; Phelan, Joan ; Lin, Louis ; Fisch, Gene. / Evaluation of Pathologists (Histopathology) and Radiologists (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) Differentiating Radicular Cysts from Granulomas. In: Journal of Endodontics. 2010 ; Vol. 36, No. 3. pp. 423-428.
@article{ef1d800d245d470898ccbaeb7b587a31,
title = "Evaluation of Pathologists (Histopathology) and Radiologists (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) Differentiating Radicular Cysts from Granulomas",
abstract = "Introduction: This study investigated the differentiation of radicular cysts from granulomas. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging was compared with the existing standard, biopsy and histopathology. Methods: Forty-five patients scheduled for an apicoectomy received a CBCT scan of the involved arch. Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists, working independently and using the same criteria, categorized the CBCT images as one of the following: cyst, likely cyst, likely granuloma, granuloma, or other. After apicoectomies, two oral pathologists, working independently and using the same criteria, diagnosed the surgical specimens as one of the following: radicular cyst, granuloma, or other. We examined the following: (1) interrater agreement between pathologists as to the biopsy diagnosis, (2) interrater agreement between radiologists as to the CBCT diagnosis, and (3) accuracy of radiologists' diagnostic assessments using histopathology as the standard. Results: Findings showed strong interrater reliability between pathologists (κ = 0.79, z = 5.46, p < 0.0001) and weak interrater reliability between radiologists (κ = 0.14, p = not significant). Accuracy (true-positives plus true-negatives) for the two radiologists was 51{\%} and 63{\%}. Conclusion: Under the conditions of this study, based on the inconsistency of the radiologists' reports as evidenced by statistical analyses, it was concluded that CBCT imaging is not a reliable diagnostic method for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas. Surgical biopsy and histopathological evaluation remain the standard procedure for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas.",
keywords = "Cone beam computed tomography, differentiating lesions, granuloma, radicular cyst",
author = "Paul Rosenberg and Jared Frisbie and Jaehoon Lee and Kyung Lee and Herbert Frommer and Shailesh Kottal and Joan Phelan and Louis Lin and Gene Fisch",
year = "2010",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "36",
pages = "423--428",
journal = "Journal of Endodontics",
issn = "0099-2399",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of Pathologists (Histopathology) and Radiologists (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) Differentiating Radicular Cysts from Granulomas

AU - Rosenberg, Paul

AU - Frisbie, Jared

AU - Lee, Jaehoon

AU - Lee, Kyung

AU - Frommer, Herbert

AU - Kottal, Shailesh

AU - Phelan, Joan

AU - Lin, Louis

AU - Fisch, Gene

PY - 2010/3

Y1 - 2010/3

N2 - Introduction: This study investigated the differentiation of radicular cysts from granulomas. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging was compared with the existing standard, biopsy and histopathology. Methods: Forty-five patients scheduled for an apicoectomy received a CBCT scan of the involved arch. Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists, working independently and using the same criteria, categorized the CBCT images as one of the following: cyst, likely cyst, likely granuloma, granuloma, or other. After apicoectomies, two oral pathologists, working independently and using the same criteria, diagnosed the surgical specimens as one of the following: radicular cyst, granuloma, or other. We examined the following: (1) interrater agreement between pathologists as to the biopsy diagnosis, (2) interrater agreement between radiologists as to the CBCT diagnosis, and (3) accuracy of radiologists' diagnostic assessments using histopathology as the standard. Results: Findings showed strong interrater reliability between pathologists (κ = 0.79, z = 5.46, p < 0.0001) and weak interrater reliability between radiologists (κ = 0.14, p = not significant). Accuracy (true-positives plus true-negatives) for the two radiologists was 51% and 63%. Conclusion: Under the conditions of this study, based on the inconsistency of the radiologists' reports as evidenced by statistical analyses, it was concluded that CBCT imaging is not a reliable diagnostic method for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas. Surgical biopsy and histopathological evaluation remain the standard procedure for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas.

AB - Introduction: This study investigated the differentiation of radicular cysts from granulomas. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging was compared with the existing standard, biopsy and histopathology. Methods: Forty-five patients scheduled for an apicoectomy received a CBCT scan of the involved arch. Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists, working independently and using the same criteria, categorized the CBCT images as one of the following: cyst, likely cyst, likely granuloma, granuloma, or other. After apicoectomies, two oral pathologists, working independently and using the same criteria, diagnosed the surgical specimens as one of the following: radicular cyst, granuloma, or other. We examined the following: (1) interrater agreement between pathologists as to the biopsy diagnosis, (2) interrater agreement between radiologists as to the CBCT diagnosis, and (3) accuracy of radiologists' diagnostic assessments using histopathology as the standard. Results: Findings showed strong interrater reliability between pathologists (κ = 0.79, z = 5.46, p < 0.0001) and weak interrater reliability between radiologists (κ = 0.14, p = not significant). Accuracy (true-positives plus true-negatives) for the two radiologists was 51% and 63%. Conclusion: Under the conditions of this study, based on the inconsistency of the radiologists' reports as evidenced by statistical analyses, it was concluded that CBCT imaging is not a reliable diagnostic method for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas. Surgical biopsy and histopathological evaluation remain the standard procedure for differentiating radicular cysts from granulomas.

KW - Cone beam computed tomography

KW - differentiating lesions

KW - granuloma

KW - radicular cyst

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=76449083940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=76449083940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.005

DO - 10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.005

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 423

EP - 428

JO - Journal of Endodontics

JF - Journal of Endodontics

SN - 0099-2399

IS - 3

ER -