Ilser Turkyilmaz1, Oguz Ozan, Burak Yilmaz, Ahmet Ersan Ersoy. 1. Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, College of Dentistry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43218-2357, USA. turkyilmaz.1@osu.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The type and architecture of bone are very important factors in the successful implant treatment, and it is manifested that higher implant failure is more likely in the poorer quality of bone. Conventional bone classifications have recently been questioned because they are subjective and retrospective. PURPOSE: This clinical study aimed to determine the variations of the bone density in dental implant recipient sites using computerized tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group comprised of randomly selected 140 patients with 372 implant sites. Recipient sites for implant placement were determined based on CT data using implant planning StentCad software (Media Lab Software, La Spezia, Italy). The mean bone density values in Hounsfield unit (HU) of the simulated implant areas were recorded using the StentCad software. RESULTS: The HU values ranged from 68 to 1,603 HU. It was found that mean bone density values were 927 +/- 237, 721 +/- 291, 708 +/- 277, and 505 +/- 274 HU in the anterior mandible, posterior mandible, anterior maxilla, and posterior maxilla, respectively. CONCLUSION: Preoperative CT examination may be a useful method for determining the bone density of recipient areas before implant placement, and this valuable information about bone quality helps clinicians to make better treatment planning regarding the implant positions.
BACKGROUND: The type and architecture of bone are very important factors in the successful implant treatment, and it is manifested that higher implant failure is more likely in the poorer quality of bone. Conventional bone classifications have recently been questioned because they are subjective and retrospective. PURPOSE: This clinical study aimed to determine the variations of the bone density in dental implant recipient sites using computerized tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group comprised of randomly selected 140 patients with 372 implant sites. Recipient sites for implant placement were determined based on CT data using implant planning StentCad software (Media Lab Software, La Spezia, Italy). The mean bone density values in Hounsfield unit (HU) of the simulated implant areas were recorded using the StentCad software. RESULTS: The HU values ranged from 68 to 1,603 HU. It was found that mean bone density values were 927 +/- 237, 721 +/- 291, 708 +/- 277, and 505 +/- 274 HU in the anterior mandible, posterior mandible, anterior maxilla, and posterior maxilla, respectively. CONCLUSION: Preoperative CT examination may be a useful method for determining the bone density of recipient areas before implant placement, and this valuable information about bone quality helps clinicians to make better treatment planning regarding the implant positions.
Authors: Marjorie Eguren; Anderson Holguin; Karla Diaz; Jose Vidalon; Carlos Linan; Camila Pacheco-Pereira; Manuel Oscar Lagravere Vich Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2021-06-19 Impact factor: 2.419