Dental age assessment in the living: a comparison of two common stage classifications for assessing radiographic visibility of the root canals in mandibular third molars

Abstract

AbstractAfter dentition is complete, degenerative tooth characteristics can be used for dental age assessment. Radiological assessment of the visibility of the root canals of the mandibular third molars in dental panoramic radiographs (DPRs) is known to be one such suitable feature. Essentially, two different stage classifications are available for evaluating the visibility of the root canals of mandibular third molars in the DPR. The aim of this study was to determine if one method outperforms the other. Therefore, the 2010 method of Olze et al. was directly compared to the 2017 method of Lucas et al. in the 2020 modification of Al Qattan et al. To this end, 233 DPRs from 116 females and 117 males aged 20.0 to 40.9 years were evaluated by three independent experienced examiners. In addition, one examiner ran two independent evaluations. Correlation between age and stage was investigated, and the inter- and intra-rater reliability was estimated for both methods. Correlation between age and stage was higher with the Olze method (Spearman rho 0.388 [95% CI 0.309, 0.462], males and 0.283 [95% CI 0.216, 0.357], females) than the Lucas method (0.212 [95% CI 0.141, 0.284], males and 0.265 [95% CI 0.193, 0.340], females). The intra-rater repeatability of the Olze method (Krippendorff’s α = 0.576 [95% CI 0.508, 0.644], males and α = 0.592 [95% CI 0.523, 0.661], females) was greater than that for the Lucas method (intra-rater α = 0.422 [95% CI 0.382, 0.502], males and α = 0.516 [95% CI 0.523, 0.661], females). Inter-rater reproducibility was also greater for the Olze method (α = 0.542 [95% CI 0.463, 0.620], males and α = 0.533 [95% CI 0.451, 0.615], females) compared to the Lucas method (α = 0.374 [95% CI 0.304, 0.443], males and α = 0.432 [95% CI 0.359, 0.505], females). The method of Olze et al. was found to present marginal advantages to the Lucas et al. method across all examinations and may be a more appropriate method for application in future studies.