Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images
- PMID: 23442085
- DOI: 10.1111/clr.12126
Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images
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.
Keywords: cone beam computed tomography; digital panoramic radiography; implant planning; implant size.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of panoramic and conventional cross-sectional tomography for preoperative selection of implant size.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Apr;22(4):424-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02006.x. Epub 2010 Nov 3. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011. PMID: 21054555 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical dental implant assessment.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Oct;66(10):2130-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.021. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008. PMID: 18848113
-
Reliability of Orthopantomography and Cone-beam Computed Tomography in Presurgical Implant Planning: A Clinical Study.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017 Aug 1;18(8):665-669. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2103. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017. PMID: 28816186
-
Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:393-415. doi: 10.1111/clr.13142. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018. PMID: 30328204
-
Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: recommendations for clinical use.BMC Oral Health. 2018 May 15;18(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s12903-018-0523-5. BMC Oral Health. 2018. PMID: 29764458 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Anterior maxilla alveolar ridge dimension and morphology measurement by cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) for immediate implant treatment planning.BMC Oral Health. 2015 Jun 10;15:65. doi: 10.1186/s12903-015-0055-1. BMC Oral Health. 2015. PMID: 26059796 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Ridge Mapping and Cone Beam Computed Tomography for the Determination of Alveolar Ridge Width.J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022 Sep;21(3):802-807. doi: 10.1007/s12663-021-01530-3. Epub 2021 Mar 18. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022. PMID: 36274889 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Dental Panoramic Radiography and CBCT for Measuring Vertical Bone Height in Different Horizontal Locations of Posterior Mandibular Alveolar Process.J Dent (Shiraz). 2018 Jun;19(2):83-91. J Dent (Shiraz). 2018. PMID: 29854881 Free PMC article.
-
Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: An Evidence-Based Review.Dent J (Basel). 2019 May 2;7(2):52. doi: 10.3390/dj7020052. Dent J (Basel). 2019. PMID: 31052495 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Influence of 2D vs 3D imaging and professional experience on dental implant treatment planning.Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Feb;23(2):929-936. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2511-1. Epub 2018 Jun 16. Clin Oral Investig. 2019. PMID: 29907931
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources