Saverio Cosola1,2, Paolo Toti3,4, Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago5, Ugo Covani3, Bruno Carlo Brevi6, David Peñarrocha-Oltra5. 1. Department of Stomatology, Tuscan Stomatological Institute, Foundation for Dental Clinic, Research and Continuing Education, Via Padre Ignazio da Carrara 39, 55042, Forte Dei Marmi, Italy. s.cosola@hotmail.it. 2. Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of ValenciaGascó, Oliag Street 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain. s.cosola@hotmail.it. 3. Department of Stomatology, Tuscan Stomatological Institute, Foundation for Dental Clinic, Research and Continuing Education, Via Padre Ignazio da Carrara 39, 55042, Forte Dei Marmi, Italy. 4. Department of Multidisciplinary Regenerative Research, "Guglielmo Marconi University", Via Plinio 44, 00193, Rome, Italy. 5. Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of ValenciaGascó, Oliag Street 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain. 6. Department of Maxillo-Facial Surgery (Acting Director: Dr. Bruno Brevi), Hospital and University of Pisa, Via Piero Trivella, 56124, Pisa, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To introduce a theoretical solution to a posteriori describe the pose of a cylindrical dental fixture as appearing on radiographs; to experimentally validate the method described. METHODS: The pose of a conventional dental implant was described by a triplet of angles (phi-pitch, theta-roll, and psi-yaw) which was calculated throughout vector analysis. Radiographic- and simulated-image obtained with an algorithm were compared to test effectiveness, reproducibility, and accuracy of the method. The length of the dental implant as appearing on the simulated image was calculated by the trigonometric function and then compared with real length as it appeared on a two-dimensional radiograph. RESULTS: Twenty radiographs were analyzed for the present in silico and retrospective study. Among 40 fittings, 37 resulted as resolved with residuals ≤ 1 mm. Similar results were obtained for radiographic and simulated implants with absolute errors of - 1.1° ± 3.9° for phi; - 0.9° ± 4.1° for theta; 0° ± 1.1° for psi. The real and simulated length of the implants appeared to be heavily correlated. Linear dependence was verified by the results of the robust linear regression: 0.9757 (slope), + 0.1344 mm (intercept), and an adjusted coefficient of determination of 0.9054. CONCLUSIONS: The method allowed clinicians to calculate, a posteriori, a single real triplet of angles (phi, theta, psi) by analyzing a two-dimensional radiograph and to identify cases where standardization of repeated intraoral radiographies was not achieved. The a posteriori standardization of two-dimensional radiographs could allowed the clinicians to minimize the patient's exposure to ionizing radiations for the measurement of marginal bone levels around dental implants.
BACKGROUND: To introduce a theoretical solution to a posteriori describe the pose of a cylindrical dental fixture as appearing on radiographs; to experimentally validate the method described. METHODS: The pose of a conventional dental implant was described by a triplet of angles (phi-pitch, theta-roll, and psi-yaw) which was calculated throughout vector analysis. Radiographic- and simulated-image obtained with an algorithm were compared to test effectiveness, reproducibility, and accuracy of the method. The length of the dental implant as appearing on the simulated image was calculated by the trigonometric function and then compared with real length as it appeared on a two-dimensional radiograph. RESULTS: Twenty radiographs were analyzed for the present in silico and retrospective study. Among 40 fittings, 37 resulted as resolved with residuals ≤ 1 mm. Similar results were obtained for radiographic and simulated implants with absolute errors of - 1.1° ± 3.9° for phi; - 0.9° ± 4.1° for theta; 0° ± 1.1° for psi. The real and simulated length of the implants appeared to be heavily correlated. Linear dependence was verified by the results of the robust linear regression: 0.9757 (slope), + 0.1344 mm (intercept), and an adjusted coefficient of determination of 0.9054. CONCLUSIONS: The method allowed clinicians to calculate, a posteriori, a single real triplet of angles (phi, theta, psi) by analyzing a two-dimensional radiograph and to identify cases where standardization of repeated intraoral radiographies was not achieved. The a posteriori standardization of two-dimensional radiographs could allowed the clinicians to minimize the patient's exposure to ionizing radiations for the measurement of marginal bone levels around dental implants.
Authors: Marcus Stoetzer; Maximilian E H Wagner; Daniela Wenzel; Daniel Lindhorst; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Constantin von See Journal: Implant Dent Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 2.454
Authors: Paras Ahmad; Mohammad Khursheed Alam; Ali Aldajani; Abdulmajeed Alahmari; Amal Alanazi; Martin Stoddart; Mohammed G Sghaireen Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Francesco Grecchi; Luigi V Stefanelli; Fabrizio Grivetto; Emma Grecchi; Rami Siev; Ziv Mazor; Massimo Del Fabbro; Nicola Pranno; Alessio Franchina; Vittorio Di Lucia; Francesca De Angelis; Funda Goker Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 3.390