Mustafa Tattan1, Khaled Sinjab2, Eunjee Lee3, Michelle Arnett4, Tae-Ju Oh2, Hom-Lay Wang2, Hsun-Liang Chan2, Oliver D Kripfgans5,6. 1. Department of Periodontics and Iowa Institute for Oral Health Research, University of Iowa College of Dentistry, Iowa City, IA, USA. 2. Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Department of Information and Statistics, Chungnam National University, Daejoen, South Korea. 4. Department of Primary Dental Care, Division of Dental Hygiene, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 6. Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The crestal bone level and soft tissue dimension are essential for periodontal diagnosis and phenotype determination; yet, existing measurement methods have limitations. The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the correlation and accuracy of ultrasound in measuring periodontal dimensions, compared to direct clinical and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) methods. METHODS: A 24-MHz ultrasound probe prototype, specifically designed for intraoral use, was employed. Periodontal soft tissue dimensions and crestal bone levels were measured at 40 teeth and 20 single missing tooth gaps from 20 patients scheduled to receive a dental implant surgery. The ultrasound images were interpreted by two calibrated examiners. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by using inter-rater correlation coefficient (ICC). Ultrasound readings were compared with direct clinical and CBCT readings by using ICC and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: The following six parameters were measured: 1) interdental papilla height (tooth), 2) mid-facial soft tissue height (tooth), 3) mucosal thickness (tooth), 4) soft tissue height (edentulous ridge), 5) mucosal thickness (edentulous ridge), and 6) crestal bone level (tooth). Intra-examiner calibrations were exercised to achieve an agreement of at least 0.8. ICC between the two readers ranged from 0.482 to 0.881. ICC between ultrasound and direct readings ranged from 0.667 to 0.957. The mean difference in mucosal thickness (tooth) between the ultrasound and direct readings was -0.015 mm (95% CI: -0.655 to 0.624 mm) without statistical significance. ICC between ultrasound and CBCT ranged from 0.654 to 0.849 among the measured parameters. The mean differences between ultrasound and CBCT range from -0.213 to 0.455 mm, without statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic imaging can be valuable for accurate and real-time periodontal diagnosis without concerns about ionizing radiation.
BACKGROUND: The crestal bone level and soft tissue dimension are essential for periodontal diagnosis and phenotype determination; yet, existing measurement methods have limitations. The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the correlation and accuracy of ultrasound in measuring periodontal dimensions, compared to direct clinical and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) methods. METHODS: A 24-MHz ultrasound probe prototype, specifically designed for intraoral use, was employed. Periodontal soft tissue dimensions and crestal bone levels were measured at 40 teeth and 20 single missing tooth gaps from 20 patients scheduled to receive a dental implant surgery. The ultrasound images were interpreted by two calibrated examiners. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by using inter-rater correlation coefficient (ICC). Ultrasound readings were compared with direct clinical and CBCT readings by using ICC and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: The following six parameters were measured: 1) interdental papilla height (tooth), 2) mid-facial soft tissue height (tooth), 3) mucosal thickness (tooth), 4) soft tissue height (edentulous ridge), 5) mucosal thickness (edentulous ridge), and 6) crestal bone level (tooth). Intra-examiner calibrations were exercised to achieve an agreement of at least 0.8. ICC between the two readers ranged from 0.482 to 0.881. ICC between ultrasound and direct readings ranged from 0.667 to 0.957. The mean difference in mucosal thickness (tooth) between the ultrasound and direct readings was -0.015 mm (95% CI: -0.655 to 0.624 mm) without statistical significance. ICC between ultrasound and CBCT ranged from 0.654 to 0.849 among the measured parameters. The mean differences between ultrasound and CBCT range from -0.213 to 0.455 mm, without statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic imaging can be valuable for accurate and real-time periodontal diagnosis without concerns about ionizing radiation.
Authors: Mohamed Elbarbary; Adam Sgro; Saber Khazaei; Michael Goldberg; Howard C Tenenbaum; Amir Azarpazhooh Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Colman Moore; Yong Cheng; Natalia Tjokro; Brendan Zhang; Matthew Kerr; Mohammed Hayati; Kai Chiao Joe Chang; Nisarg Shah; Casey Chen; Jesse V Jokerst Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 16.823
Authors: Magdalena Bednarz-Tumidajewicz; Aneta Furtak; Aneta Zakrzewska; Małgorzata Rąpała; Karolina Gerreth; Tomasz Gedrange; Wojciech Bednarz Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-27 Impact factor: 4.614