Cross-sectional tomograms obtained with four panoramic radiographic units in the assessment of implant site measurements

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 295-300

  Peltola, J S ^a   Mattila, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Cross sectional tomography; Dental implantation; Panoramic radiography; Radiology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; MANDIBLE; MEASUREMENT; PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TOMOGRAPHY; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; X RAY; ANATOMY; CADAVER; CEPHALOMETRY; EDENTULOUSNESS; IMAGE QUALITY; INSTRUMENTATION; MICRORADIOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHY; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; X RAY FILM;

ANATOMY, CROSS-SECTIONAL; CADAVER; CEPHALOMETRY; DENTAL IMPLANTS; HUMANS; JAW, EDENTULOUS; MANDIBLE; MICRORADIOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; RADIOGRAPHY, PANORAMIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY; X-RAY FILM; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 14244262264     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/14606317     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Frederiksen NL. Diagnostic imaging in dental implantology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80: 540-554.
2. Gröndahl K, Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl H-G, Johnsson T. Reliability of hypocycloidal tomography for the evaluation of the distance from the alveolar crest to the mandibular canal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991; 19: 200-204.
3. Ekestubbe A, Thilander A, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl H-G. Absorbed doses from computed tomography for dental implant surgery: comparison with conventional tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993; 22: 3-17.
4. Dula K, Mini R, Van der Stelt PF, Buser D. A radiographic assessment of implant patients: decision-making criteria. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16: 80-89.
5. Lecomber AR, Yoneyama Y, Lovelock DJ, Hosoi T, Adams AM. Comparison of patient dose from imaging protocols for dental implant planning using conventional radiography and computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001; 30: 255-259.
6. Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl H-G. Quality of preimplant low-dose tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999; 88: 738-744.
7. Potter BJ, Shrout MK, Russel CM, Sharawy M. Implant site assessment using panoramic cross-sectional tomographic imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1997; 84: 436-442.
8. Fleis U, Cohen E. Large sample standard errors of Kappa and weighted Kappa. Psychol Bull 1969; 72: 323-327.
9. Tammisalo E, Hallikainen D, Kanerva H, Tammisalo T. Comprehensive oral X-ray diagnosis: Scanora® multimodal radiography. A preliminary description. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1992; 21: 9-15.
10. Curry TS, Dowdey JE, Murry RC. Christensen's physics of diagnostic radiology (4th edn). Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger: 1990: 246-247.
11. Liang H, Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB, Lang LA, Nunn ME. Accuracy of mandibular cross-sectional imaging with tuned-aperture computed tomography (TACT), iteratively reconstructed TACT, and multidirectional, linear, and transverse panoramic tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001; 91: 594-602.
12. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174.
13. Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl H-G. Reliability of spiral tomography with the Scanora® technique for dental implant planning. Clin Oral Impl Res 1993; 14: 195-202.
14. Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl K, Ekholm S, Johansson PE, Gröndahl H-G. Low-dose tomographic techniques for dental implant planning. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996; 11: 650-659.
15. Ekestubbe A, Gröndahl H-G, Molander B. Quality of digital pre-implant tomography: comparison of film-screen images with storage phosphor images at normal and low dose. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003; 32: 322-326.