Computed tomography for dental implants: The influence of the gantry angle and mandibular positioning on the bone height and width

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 9-15

  Dantas, Jana A ^a,c   Montebello Filho, A ^a   Campos, P S F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF BAHIA   (Brazil)

^c NONE   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Dental implants; Mandible; Tomography; X ray computed

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ANATOMICAL VARIATION; ARTICLE; CANINE TOOTH; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INCISOR; MANDIBLE; MEDICAL ERROR; PATIENT POSITIONING; SIMULATION; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TOOTH IMPLANTATION;

DENTAL IMPLANTATION, ENDOSSEOUS; DENTAL IMPLANTS; HUMANS; JAW, EDENTULOUS; MANDIBLE; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; POSTURE; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 14844348735     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/57866813     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Schwarz MS, Rothman SL, Chafetz N, Rhodes M. Computed tomography in dental implantation surgery. Dent Clin North Am 1989; 33: 555-597.
2. Bou Serhal C, Jacobs R, Flygare L, Quirynen M, Van Steenberghe D. Perioperative validation of localisation of the mental foramen. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 31: 39-43.
3. Yang J, Cavalcanti MGP, Ruprecht A, Vannier MW. 2-D and 3-D reconstructions of spiral computed tomography in localization of the inferior alveolar canal for dental implants. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999; 87: 369-374.
4. Tal H, Moses O. A comparison of panoramic radiography with computed tomography in the planning of implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991; 20: 40-42.
5. Akça K, Iplikçioglu H. Evaluation of the effect of the residual bone angulation on implant-supported fixed prostheses in mandibular posterior edentulism. Part I: Spiral computed tomography study. Implant Dent 2001; 10: 216-222.
6. Tepper G, Hofschneider UB, Gahleitner A, Ulm C. Computed tomographic diagnosis and localization of bone canals in the mandibular interforaminal region for prevention of bleeding complications during implant surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16: 68-72.
7. Jacobs R, Mraiwa N, Van Steenberghe D, Gijbels F, Quirynen M. Appearance, location, course, and morphology of the mandibular incisive canal: an assessment on spiral CT scan. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 31: 322-327.
8. Cavalcanti MGP, Yang J Ruprecht A, Vannier MW. Validation of spiral computed tomography for dental implants. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1998; 27: 329-333.
9. Scher E. Risk management when operating in the posterior mandible. Implant Dent 2002; 11: 67-71.
10. Rothman SLG, Chaftez N, Rhodes ML, Schwartz MS. CT in the preoperative assessment of the mandible and maxilla for endosseous implant surgery. Radiology 1988; 168: 171-175.
11. Abrahams JJ. The role of diagnostic imaging in dental implantology. Radiol Clin North Am 1993; 31: 163-177.
12. Kohavi D, Bar-Ziv J, Marmary Y. Effect of axial plane deviation on cross-sectional height in reformatted computed tomography of the mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997; 26: 189-191.
13. Choi S-C, Ann C-H, Choi H-M, Heo M-S, Lee S-S. Accuracy of reformatted CT image for measuring the pre-implant site: analysis of the image distortion related to the gantry angle change. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 31: 273-277.
14. Besimo CE, Lambrecht JT, Guindy JS. Accuracy of implant treatment planning utilizing template-guided reformatted computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2000; 29: 46-51.