D Kopecka1, A Simunek2, J Streblov3, R Slezak1, L Capek4. 1. Department of Dentistry, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Simkova 870, 50038 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. 2. Department of Dentistry, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Simkova 870, 50038 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic; Department of Dentistry, Teaching Hospital, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. simunek@email.cz. 3. Private dental practice, Jankovcova 16/788, 17000 Prague, Czech Republic. 4. Technical University of Liberec, Department of Applied Mechanics, Studentska 2, 46117 Liberec, Czech Republic.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the dimensions of interantral bone available for dental implant placement in the fully edentulous maxilla. METHODS: Interantral bone height (IBH) was measured using panoramic radiography and computed tomography (CT). Interantral bone width (IBW) was measured by means of CT. RESULTS: The difference between both imaging methods in IBH assessment was highly statistically significant (p < 0.001) in the canine area, whereas in other areas it was found not to be significant. Measured in the CT scans, bone is significantly higher in the canine area compared to the area of central and lateral incisors (p < 0.001). Significant variations in IBW were found in all three locations: bone in the central incisor area is the widest, in the area of the lateral incisor, the narrowest (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Panoramic radiography is a sufficiently accurate method for IBH imaging in the incisor area, but not in the canine area.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the dimensions of interantral bone available for dental implant placement in the fully edentulous maxilla. METHODS: Interantral bone height (IBH) was measured using panoramic radiography and computed tomography (CT). Interantral bone width (IBW) was measured by means of CT. RESULTS: The difference between both imaging methods in IBH assessment was highly statistically significant (p < 0.001) in the canine area, whereas in other areas it was found not to be significant. Measured in the CT scans, bone is significantly higher in the canine area compared to the area of central and lateral incisors (p < 0.001). Significant variations in IBW were found in all three locations: bone in the central incisor area is the widest, in the area of the lateral incisor, the narrowest (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Panoramic radiography is a sufficiently accurate method for IBH imaging in the incisor area, but not in the canine area.
Authors: U Lekholm; R Adell; J Lindhe; P I Brånemark; B Eriksson; B Rockler; A M Lindvall; T Yoneyama Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 1986-02 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Sebastian Berger; Paul Hakl; Walter Sutter; Marius Meier; Henning Roland; Patrick Bandura; Dritan Turhani Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2019-10-28