Table 2 Summary of imaging diagnostic techniques for cracked tooth
From: A perspective on the diagnosis of cracked tooth: imaging modalities evolve to AI-based analysis
Method | Voxel size | Width can be detected | Radiation | Advantage | Disadvantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oral X-rays | Â | Â | Lower | Wide range of applications, cheap | Low efficiency, anatomic superimposition, distortion |
CT | Â | Â | High | Fast, Three-dimensional imaging | Expensive, presence of artifacts, low spatial resolution |
CBCT | 75–400 μm [51] 125–2000 μm [34] 80 μm [49] 250 μm [50] | 50–300 μm [148] | Low | Easily operate, safe, cheap, accurate, High spatial resolution | Difficult to obtain good soft tissue detail, presence of artifacts |
Micro-CT | 5–20 μm [89] 13.67 μm [67] | 5–20 μm [89] | Extremely high | High spatial resolution, fast, and precise | Cannot be applied in vivo |
Ultrasound |  | 4–35.5 μm (VibroIR) [78] | No | Non-invasive, painless, accurate, visualization of hard and soft tissue, and good acceptance by patients | Difficult to operate |
OCT |  | 10 μm [86] | No | High resolution, non-invasive, cheap, accurate, real-time imaging, safe | Noise in the image |
MRI |  | Around 20 µm [93] | No | Non-invasive, Contrast resolution, | Noisy, expensive, easily distorted by metal |