Literature DB >> 21044170

Vertical palatal bone dimensions on lateral cephalometry and cone-beam computed tomography: implications for palatal implant placement.

Britta A Jung1, Heinrich Wehrbein, Lothar Heuser, Martin Kunkel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the necessity of three-dimensional imaging (computed tomography [CT]/cone-beam computed tomography [CBCT]) for paramedian insertion of palatal implants.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Lateral radiographs and CBCT scans were performed from 18 human skulls. For lateral cephalometry, the nasal floor (right/left) and the oral hard palate of all skulls were lined with a tin foil for contrast enhancement. The quantity of vertical bone as measured on lateral radiographs was compared with CBCT measurements obtained in median and parasagittal planes and at minimum bone height. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were determined for bivariate correlation analysis.
RESULTS: The median palatal bone height on CBCT (mean 8.98 mm; standard deviation [SD] 3.4) was markedly higher than the vertical height seen on lateral radiographs (mean 6.6 mm; SD 3.2). Comparing lateral cephalometry with CBCT, the strongest association was observed at the minimum palatal bone height (r=0.926; P<0.001; Spearman's rank correlation coefficient).
CONCLUSIONS: Lateral radiographs allow accurate and adequate assessment of vertical bone before paramedian insertion of palatal implants. The vertical bone dimension as displayed on lateral cephalometry reflects the minimum bone height rather than maximum bone in the median plane. Therefore, a preoperative CT or CBCT is only indicated when the lateral cephalometry reveals a marginal quantity of bone.
© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21044170     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02021.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  6 in total

1.  What is the best position for palatal implants? A CBCT study on bone volume in the growing maxilla.

Authors:  Darafsch Kawa; Martin Kunkel; Lothar Heuser; Britta A Jung
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 2.  Two-dimensional radiographs versus cone-beam computed tomography in planning mini-implant placement: A systematic review.

Authors:  Gabriela-Franco-da Rosa Caetano; Mariana-Quirino-Silveira Soares; Luciana-Butini Oliveira; José-Luiz-Cintra Junqueira; Monikelly-do Carmo-Chagas Nascimento
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2022-08-01

3.  Suitability of virtual plaster models superimposed with the lateral cephalogram for guided paramedian orthodontic mini-implant placement with regard to the bone support.

Authors:  Stephan Christian Möhlhenrich; Maximilian Brandt; Kristian Kniha; Anna Bock; Andreas Prescher; Frank Hölzle; Ali Modabber; Golamreza Danesh
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 1.938

4.  Mini-implants in the palatal slope--a retrospective analysis of implant survival and tissue reaction.

Authors:  Thomas Ziebura; Stefanie Flieger; Dirk Wiechmann
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 2.151

5.  Binary logistic regression analysis of hard palate dimensions for sexing human crania.

Authors:  Venkatesh Kamath; Muhammed Asif; Radhakrishna Shetty; Ramakrishna Avadhani
Journal:  Anat Cell Biol       Date:  2016-06-24

6.  Quantitative evaluation of palatal bone thickness in patients with normal and open vertical skeletal configurations using cone-beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Piyoros Suteerapongpun; Tanapan Wattanachai; Apirum Janhom; Polbhat Tripuwabhrut; Dhirawat Jotikasthira
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2018-03-19
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.