Literature DB >> 22458628

A comparison of cone beam computed tomography and conventional periapical radiography at detecting peri-implant bone defects.

Meetal Dave1, Jonathan Davies, Ron Wilson, Richard Palmer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) at detecting peri-implant bone defects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants were placed in fresh bovine ribs in osteotomy sites of varying diameter (five with no peri-implant space, five with a 0.35 mm space, five with a 0.675 mm space) and imaged using (i) digital long cone periapical radiographs (LCPAs), (ii) limited volume CBCT using 3D Accuitomo 80(®) and (iii) large volume CBCT using i-CAT Next Generation(®). Images from each were randomly presented to nine examiners on two occasions. Confidence in diagnosing the presence or absence of a peri-implant radiolucency was recorded on a five-point scale. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis and Kappa tests were performed.
RESULTS: Digital LCPAs were better at diagnosing a peri-implant bone defect when the peri-implant space was 0.35 mm (P < 0.02). As the peri-implant space increased to 0.675 mm, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the three imaging methods. Sensitivity of LCPAs (100) and Accuitomo (97.8) was better than i-CAT (64.4) (P < 0.02). LCPAs and i-CAT had significantly better specificity and positive predictive value than Accuitomo. The negative predictive value of LCPA was significantly better than i-CAT. LCPAs showed better intra-examiner and inter-examiner agreement than CBCT.
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, LCPAs are a reliable and valid method of detecting circumferential peri-implant bone defects and performed significantly better than CBCT.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22458628     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02473.x

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


  14 in total

1.  Imaging evaluating of the implant/bone interface-an in vitro radiographic study.

Authors:  Michele M Vidor; Gabriela S Liedke; Mariana B Vizzotto; Heraldo L D da Silveira; Priscila F da Silveira; Cristiano W Araujo; Heloisa E D da Silveira
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Evaluation of mandibular odontogenic keratocyst and ameloblastoma by panoramic radiograph and computed tomography.

Authors:  Daniel Berretta Moreira Alves; Fabrício Mesquita Tuji; Fábio Abreu Alves; André Caroli Rocha; Alan Roger Dos Santos-Silva; Pablo Agustin Vargas; Márcio Ajudarte Lopes
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  Evaluation of cervical peri-implant optical density in longitudinal control of immediate implants in the anterior maxilla region.

Authors:  Renan Lucio Berbel da Silva; Eduardo Felippe Duailibi Neto; Franscisco Fernando Todescan; Glaucio Morente Ruiz; Claudio Mendes Pannuti; Israel Chilvarquer
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Peri-implant assessment via cone beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography: an ex vivo study.

Authors:  Nicolau Silveira-Neto; Mateus Ericson Flores; João Paulo De Carli; Max Dória Costa; Felipe de Souza Matos; Luiz Renato Paranhos; Maria Salete Sandini Linden
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 2.365

5.  Comparison between different cone-beam computed tomography devices in the detection of mechanically simulated peri-implant bone defects.

Authors:  Jun Ho Kim; Reinaldo Abdala-Júnior; Luciana Munhoz; Arthur Rodriguez Gonzalez Cortes; Plauto Christopher Aranha Watanabe; Claudio Costa; Emiko Saito Arita
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2020-06-18

Review 6.  Etiology and Measurement of Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Loss (CBL).

Authors:  Adrien Naveau; Kouhei Shinmyouzu; Colman Moore; Limor Avivi-Arber; Jesse Jokerst; Sreenivas Koka
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Comparison of digital protocols for the measurement of peri-implant marginal bone loss.

Authors:  David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Ivan Palau; Guillermo Cabanes; Beatriz Tarazona; Maria Peñarrocha-Diago
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2018-12-01

8.  Detection of peri-implant bone defects using cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography with parallel and oblique projection.

Authors:  Bardia Vadiati Saberi; Negar Khosravifard; Farnaz Ghandari; Arash Hadinezhad
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2019-12-24

Review 9.  Indications for 3-D diagnostics and navigation in dental implantology with the focus on radiation exposure: a systematic review.

Authors:  Burkhard Kunzendorf; Hendrik Naujokat; Jörg Wiltfang
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-05-27

10.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Inverted and Unprocessed Digitized Periapical Radiographs for Detection of Peri-Implant Defects.

Authors:  Seyed Jalal Pourhashemi; Zahra Ghoncheh; Mohammad Taghi Kiani; Raheleh Emami; Mohamad Javad Kharazifard
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2015-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.