Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Classic Lit > Diagnostic Methods > Flashcards

Diagnostic Methods Flashcards

1
Q

Conventional vs advanced diagnostic methods

A

Conventional:
* inflammation status
* probing
* BOP
* x-rays
* mobility, furcation

Advanced:
* biomarkers (oral fluid)
* CBCT
* Ultrasound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Clinical parameters

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Evaluate attached gingiva

A

Visual assessment (color)
Schillers iodone solution (mucosa glycogen stains)
Roll technique (probe)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

KT for gingival health?

A

Lang &Loe 1972: YES (at least 2mm KT and 1mm AG

Cortellini and Bissada 2018 (AAPWW): a minimum amount of KT is NOT needed, so long as adequate oral hygiene

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Stippling

A

Rete peg invagination into CT

Karring and Loe 1970

Approx 40% of pop, sign of health (Green 1962)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

1st gen probe:

A

A) Marquis color-coded probe. Calibrations are in 3-mm sections.
B) University of North Carolina-15 probe, a 15-mm long probe with millimeter markings at each millimeter and color coding at the fifth, tenth, and 15mm.
C) University of Michigan “O” probe, with Williams markings (at 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 mm).
D) Michigan “O” probe with markings at 3, 6, and 8 mm.
E) CPITN probe, World Health Organization (WHO) probe, which has a 0.5-mm ball at the tip and millimeter markings at 3.5, 8.5, and 11.5 mm and color coding from 3.5 to 5.5 mm

CP-11 color-coded single end probe 3,6,8,11 mm (used in VIC’s)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Other probes

A

2nd gen: constant force controlled pressure probes
3rd gen: constant force plus computer assisted probe
4th gen: 3D probes
5th gen: Ultrasonographic prob

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Probe force

A

0.25-0.75 N
Van der Valden 1978

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Probe design

A

flat (original)
rounded tip (current)
0.5 mm common

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

probe stop location

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Goodson et al 1986

Factors affecting probing accuracy

A

force, angulation, inflammation, tooth surface

Average error: 0.8mm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

BOP

Lang 1986

A

Abscene of BOP: NPV 98-99%
prescence of BOP: poor predictor

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Furcation involvement

Hamp Nyman and Lindhe 1975

horizontal

A

Class 1: <3mm
Class 2: >3mm not through
Class 3: Through and through

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Furcation involvement

vertical

A

Tonetti et al 2017 (AAPWW)
A: coronal third of root
B: middle third of root
C: apical third of root

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Lamina Dura

Rams et al 1994

A

prescence of lamina dura has 100% PPV for stability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Crestal bone loss

Ortman et al 1982

A

minimum change needed to detect change is 30%

Radiographs underestimate degree of bone loss in early cases (<30%) but overestimates in advanced bone loss (>60%)

17
Q

PDL space

A

Widened in:
1. TFO
2. osteosarcoma
3. scleroderma
4. BRONJ
5. hyperparathyroidism
6. Gaucher’s disease

Narrowed in:
1. Hypophosphatemic rickets
2. fibrous dysplasia
3. ankylosis

18
Q

Calculus detection by xray

A

Only detected 44% of time

Buchanan et al 1987

19
Q

Cemental tear detection by xray

Lin et al 2011

A

56% detection

20
Q

Furcation arrow detection

Deans et al 2006

A

Sn: 38%
Sp: 92%
PPV: 72%
NPV: 75%

Name furcation arrow proposed by Hardekopf et al 1987

21
Q

CBCT

AAP best evidence review

Kim and Bassir 2017

A

non-invasive, accurate alternative to surgical exploration for vertical defects

give a more clear vision (0.1mm accuracy) of furcations than Nabers probes (0.5mm accuracy)

CBCT was bad at estimating peri-implant bucal bone thickness, especially when thin <1mm (Gonzales-Martin et al 2016)

22
Q

Ultrasound advantages

A
23
Q

Ultrasound B-mode (static)

A

Cross sectional anatomical image of soft and hard tissue

24
Q

Ultrasound dynamic image (Color mode)

A

color flow images assess veolocity of blood

tissue perfusion

red color is flow to region of interest
blue color is blood moving away from region of interest

25
Q
A
26
Q

Tattan et al 2022

A

3D ultrasound was comparable to CBCT at estimating ridge width

27
Q

imaging pros and cons

A
28
Q

Biomarkers

A

saliva and GCF are common periodontal biomarkers

29
Q

Kinney et al 2014

periodontal biomarkers

A

saliva high Sn
GCF high Sp
Combined GCF and saliva 70% Sn and Sp

30
Q

Artificial intelligence

Revilla-Leon et al 2022

A

plaque: accuracy 74-99%
Gingivitis from photographs: accuracy 74-78%
F

Classic Lit (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions