Assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant and periodontal defects using a cone beam CT system with and without the application of metal artefact reduction mode

被引:79
作者
Kamburoglu, K. [1 ]
Kolsuz, E. [1 ]
Murat, S. [2 ]
Eren, H. [1 ]
Yuksel, S. [3 ]
Paksoy, C. S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ankara Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Dentomaxillofacial Radiol, TR-06100 Ankara, Turkey
[2] Istanbul Aydin Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Prosthet Dent, Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Yilidrim Beyazit Univ, Fac Med, Dept Biostat, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
buccal peri-implant defects; buccal periodontal defects; CBCT; artefacts; artefact reduction; diagnosis; IN-VITRO ASSESSMENT; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL IMPLANTS; BONE; RADIOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSIS; ACCURACY; CBCT;
D O I
10.1259/dmfr.20130176
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: To investigate the accuracy of cone beam CT (CBCT) images obtained with and without artefact reduction (AR) in detecting simulated buccal peri-implant and buccal periodontal defects. Methods: 42 implants inserted into edentulous mandibles, and 38 teeth present in dry mandibles were used. Simulated buccal peri-implant defects (n = 22) and buccal periodontal defects (n = 22) were prepared. 20 implants and 18 teeth without simulated defects were the control group. Images of the mandibles were obtained using a Planmeca ProMax (R) 3D Max CBCT unit (Planmeca Oy, Helsinki, Finland). Image reconstructions were prepared without and with low, medium and high AR modes. Images were viewed randomly by six observers twice for the presence of defects. Kappa coefficient was calculated. F2_LD_F1 design for non-parametric analysis of longitudinal data was used. Area under curves (AUCs) were calculated for each observer. Significance level was taken as alpha = 0.05. Results: Intraobserver kappa ranged from 0.140 to 0.792 for peri-implant and from 0.189 to 1.0 for periodontal defects. All factors were statistically significant (p < 0.001), except for image mode and implant brand. Pairwise interactions were found between periodontal defects and peri-implant defects (p < 0.001), observers (p < 0.001), observer and image mode (p < 0.001), defect model and observer (p < 0.001) and defect model, image mode and observer (p = 0.04). AUC values ranged from 0.39 to 0.52 for peri-implant and from 0.45 to 0.71 for periodontal defects. Higher AUC values were found for periodontal defects than for peri-implant defects. Conclusions: Buccal peri-implant defects were more difficult to detect than buccal periodontal defects. No difference was found among CBCT images obtained with and without AR modes.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
Angelopoulos Christos, 2012, Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, V20, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.cxom.2011.12.008
[2]   Cone beam CT scans with and without artefact reduction in root fracture detection of endodontically treated teeth [J].
Bechara, B. ;
McMahan, C. Alex ;
Moore, W. S. ;
Noujeim, M. ;
Teixeira, F. B. ;
Geha, H. .
DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 42 (05)
[3]   Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Implant Dentistry: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists Consensus Report [J].
Benavides, Erika ;
Rios, Hector F. ;
Ganz, Scott D. ;
An, Chang-Hyeon ;
Resnik, Randolph ;
Reardon, Gayle Tieszen ;
Feldman, Steven J. ;
Mah, James K. ;
Hatcher, David ;
Kim, Myung-Jin ;
Sohn, Dong-Seok ;
Palti, Ady ;
Perel, Morton L. ;
Judy, Kenneth W. M. ;
Misch, Carl E. ;
Wang, Hom-Lay .
IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2012, 21 (02) :78-86
[4]   In vitro assessment of artifacts induced by titanium dental implants in cone beam computed tomography [J].
Benic, Goran I. ;
Sancho-Puchades, Manuel ;
Jung, Ronald E. ;
Deyhle, Hans ;
Haemmerle, Christoph H. F. .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2013, 24 (04) :378-383
[5]   Peri-implant bone tissue assessment by comparing the outcome of intra-oral radiograph and cone beam computed tomography analyses to the histological standard [J].
Corpas, Livia dos Santos ;
Jacobs, Reinhilde ;
Quirynen, Marc ;
Huang, Yan ;
Naert, Ignace ;
Duyck, Joke .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2011, 22 (05) :492-499
[6]   Assessment of linear measurements of bone for implant sites in the presence of metallic artefacts using cone beam computed tomography and multislice computed tomography [J].
Cremonini, C. C. ;
Dumas, M. ;
Pannuti, C. M. ;
Neto, J. B. C. ;
Cavalcanti, M. G. P. ;
Lima, L. A. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2011, 40 (08) :845-850
[7]   Beam hardening artefacts occur in dental implant scans with the NewTom® cone beam CT but not with the dental 4-row multidetector CT [J].
Draenert, F. G. ;
Coppenrath, E. ;
Herzog, P. ;
Muller, S. ;
Mueller-Lisse, U. G. .
DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2007, 36 (04) :198-203
[8]   Evaluation of demineralized bone and bone transplants in vitro and in vivo with cone beam computed tomography imaging [J].
Draenert, F. G. ;
Gebhart, F. ;
Berthold, M. ;
Gosau, M. ;
Wagner, W. .
DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2010, 39 (05) :264-269
[9]   Is there a role for the use of volumetric cone beam computed tomography in periodontics? [J].
du Bois, A. H. ;
Kardachi, B. ;
Bartold, P. M. .
AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL, 2012, 57 :103-108
[10]  
Esmaeili Farzad, 2012, J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects, V6, P49