Table 3.
Performance characteristics of periapical radiography (PR) vs CBCT in evaluation of the apical extension of obturation
| Method | OE (n) | No OE (n) | TP (n) | FP (n) | TN (n) | FN (n) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBCT | 65 | 258 | 65 | 0 | 247 | 11 | 0.86 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.96 |
| PR | 50 | 273 | 50 | 0 | 247 | 26 | 0.66 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.90 |
| Photomicrography | 76 | 247 |
FN, number of false negatives; FP, number of false positives; No OE, number of non-overextension cases; NPV, negative-predictive value; OE, number of overextension cases; PPV, positive-predictive value; TN, number of true negatives; TP, number of true positives.
Photomicrography results were considered as the gold standard.
χ2 = 13.067, p < 0.005 for PR vs CBCT.