Table of Contents
ISRN Dentistry
Volume 2011, Article ID 363578, 4 pages
Research Article

Are Panoramic Radiographs Reliable to Diagnose Mild Alveolar Bone Resorption?

1Department of Radiology, Especialista em Radiologia, UNIDERP, Rua Ceará 333, 79003-010 Campo Grande, MS, Brazil
2Department of Endodontics, Dental School, University of Cuiabá, Avenida Beira Rio 3100, 78065 900 Cuiabá, MT, Brazil
3Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental School, University of Cuiabá, Avenida Beira Rio 3100, 78065 900 Cuiabá, MT, Brazil
4Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Community Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Al. Octávio Pinheiro Brisola, 9-75, 17012-901 Bauru, SP, Brazil
5Discipline of Hospital Dentistry, University of Cuiabá, Rua Professora Azélia de Mamoré de Melo, no. 318, Ap. 63, 78005-700 Cuiabá, MT, Brazil

Received 23 January 2011; Accepted 21 March 2011

Academic Editor: G. Sjogren

Copyright © 2011 Larissa Semenoff et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


It is extremely important to assess variations between the most used radiographs in dental practice, since minimum distortion on obtained images may change diagnosis, treatment plan, and prognosis for the patient. For this, the distance between the enamel-cementum junction and the alveolar bone crest was measured on conventional and digitized periapical, bitewing, and panoramic radiographs and compared among them. From a total of 1484 records, 39 sets of radiographs that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the study sample were selected. The measurements were grouped according to the intensity of bone loss. Statistically significant difference was found in the averages of the measurements assessed in radiographs with absence of bone loss between conventional panoramic and periapical radiographs, between digitized panoramic and periapical radiographs and between digitized bitewing and panoramic radiographs. By analyzing the results of this work and considering the research protocol used, one can conclude that small losses in height of alveolar bone crest observed in panoramic radiographs should be cautiously evaluated, as they may be overestimated.