Y-K Kim1, J-Y Park, S-G Kim, J-S Kim, J-D Kim. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and effectiveness of digital panoramic radiographs for pre-operative assessment of dental implants. METHODS: We selected 86 patients (221 implants) and calculated the length of the planned implant based on the distance between a selection of critical anatomical structures and the alveolar crest using the scaling tools provided in the digital panoramic system. We analysed the magnification rate and the difference between the actual inserted implant length and planned implant length according to the location of the implant placement and the clarity of anatomical structures seen in the panoramic radiographs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the planned implant length and actual inserted implant length (P > 0.05). The magnification rate of the width and length of the inserted implants, seen in the digital panoramic radiographs, was 127.28 ± 13.47% and 128.22 ± 4.17%, respectively. The magnification rate of the implant width was largest in the mandibular anterior part and there was a significant difference in the magnification rate of the length of implants between the maxilla and the mandible (P < 0.05). When the clarity of anatomical structures seen in the panoramic radiographs is low, the magnification rate of the width of the inserted implants is significantly higher (P < 0.05), but there is no significant difference between the planned implant length and actual inserted implant length according to the clarity of anatomical structures (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Digital panoramic radiography can be considered a simple, readily available and considerably accurate pre-operative assessment tool in the vertical dimension for dental implant therapy.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and effectiveness of digital panoramic radiographs for pre-operative assessment of dental implants. METHODS: We selected 86 patients (221 implants) and calculated the length of the planned implant based on the distance between a selection of critical anatomical structures and the alveolar crest using the scaling tools provided in the digital panoramic system. We analysed the magnification rate and the difference between the actual inserted implant length and planned implant length according to the location of the implant placement and the clarity of anatomical structures seen in the panoramic radiographs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the planned implant length and actual inserted implant length (P > 0.05). The magnification rate of the width and length of the inserted implants, seen in the digital panoramic radiographs, was 127.28 ± 13.47% and 128.22 ± 4.17%, respectively. The magnification rate of the implant width was largest in the mandibular anterior part and there was a significant difference in the magnification rate of the length of implants between the maxilla and the mandible (P < 0.05). When the clarity of anatomical structures seen in the panoramic radiographs is low, the magnification rate of the width of the inserted implants is significantly higher (P < 0.05), but there is no significant difference between the planned implant length and actual inserted implant length according to the clarity of anatomical structures (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Digital panoramic radiography can be considered a simple, readily available and considerably accurate pre-operative assessment tool in the vertical dimension for dental implant therapy.
Authors: K Dula; R Mini; P F van der Stelt; G C Sanderink; P Schneeberger; D Buser Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2001-06
Authors: L Vazquez; Y Nizamaldin; C Combescure; R Nedir; M Bischof; D M Dohan Ehrenfest; J-P Carrel; U C Belser Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Björn Riecke; Reinhard E Friedrich; Dirk Schulze; Clemens Loos; Marco Blessmann; Max Heiland; Johannes Wikner Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 3.573