Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images

46Citations
Citations of this article
96Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the implant size (width and length) planned with digital panoramic radiographs, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-generated panoramic views, or CBCT cross-sectional images, in four implant systems. Material and methods: Seventy-one patients with a total of 103 implant sites in the upper premolar and/or lower molar regions were examined with digital panoramic radiography (D-PAN) and (CBCT). A metal ball 5 mm in diameter was placed in the edentulous area for the D-PAN. CBCT data sets were reformatted to a 10-mm thick CBCT panoramic view (CBCT-pan) and 1-mm cross-sections (CBCT-cross). Measurements were performed in the images using dedicated software. All images were displayed on a monitor and assessed by three observers who outlined a dental implant by placing four reference points in the site of the implant-to-be. Differences in width and length of the implant-to-be from the three modalities were analyzed. The implant size selected in the CBCT-cross images was then compared to that selected in the other two modalities (D-PAN and CBCT-pan) for each of the implant systems separately. Results: The implant-to-be (average measurements among observers) was narrower when measured in CBCT-cross compared with both D-PAN and CBCT-Pan. For premolar sites, the width also differed significantly between D-PAN and CBCT-pan modalities. The implant-to-be was also significantly shorter when recorded in CBCT-cross than in D-PAN. In premolar sites, there were no significant differences in implant length among the three image modalities. It mattered very little for the change in implant step sizes whether CBCT-cross was compared to D-PAN or CBCT-pan images. Conclusion: Our results show that the selected implant size differs when planned on panoramic or cross-section CBCT images. In most cases, implant size measured in cross-section images was narrower and shorter than implant size measured in a panoramic image or CBCT-based panoramic view. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Correa, L. R., Spin-Neto, R., Stavropoulos, A., Schropp, L., da Silveira, H. E. D., & Wenzel, A. (2014). Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 25(6), 690–695. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12126

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free