Accuracy of linear measurements using cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in dental implant treatment planning

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1287-1294

  Luangchana, Penporn ^a   Pornprasertsuk Damrongsri, Suchaya ^a   Kiattavorncharoen, Sirichai ^a   Jirajariyavej, Bundhit ^a  

^a MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

Author keywords

CBCT; Cone beam CT; Dental implant; Digital panoramic radiography; Linear measurement accuracy; PACS

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CADAVER; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; OBSERVER VARIATION; PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHY; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS; TOOTH IMPLANTATION;

ADULT; CADAVER; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; RADIOGRAPHY, PANORAMIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84977444277     PISSN: 08822786     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4073     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Maló P, Friberg B, Polizzi G, et al. Immediate and early function of Brånemark System implants placed in the esthetic zone: A 1-year prospective clinical multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5(suppl 1):37-46.
2. Degidi M, Piattelli A, Gehrke P, Felice P, Carinci F. Five-year outcome of 111 immediate nonfunctional single restorations. J Oral Implantol 2006;32:277-285.
3. Horwitz J, Zuabi O, Peled M, Machtei EE. Immediate and delayed restoration of dental implants in periodontally susceptible patients: 1-year results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:423-429.
4. Tyndall DA, Brooks SL. Selection criteria for dental implant site imaging: A position paper of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89:630-637.
5. Hatcher DC, Dial C, Mayorga C. Cone beam CT for pre-surgical assessment of implant sites. J Calif Dent Assoc 2003;31:825-833.
6. Mah JK, Danforth RA, Bumann A, Hatcher D. Radiation absorbed in maxillofacial imaging with a new dental computed tomography device. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003;96:508-513.
7. Tsiklakis K, Donta C, Gavala S, et al. Dose reduction in maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam CT. Eur J Radiol 2005;56:413-417.
8. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006;35:219-226.
9. Dreiseidler T, Mischkowski RA, Neugebauer J, Ritter L, Zöller JE. Comparison of cone-beam imaging with orthopantomography and computerized tomography for assessment in presurgical implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:216-225.
10. Dreiseidler T, Neugebauer J, Ritter L, et al. Accuracy of a newly developed integrated system for dental implant planning. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1191-1199.
11. Vazquez L, Saulacic N, Belser U, Bernard JP. Efficacy of panoramic radiographs in the preoperative planning of posterior mandibular implants: A prospective clinical study of 1527 consecutively treated patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:81-85.
12. Tal H, Moses O. A comparison of panoramic radiography with computed tomography in the planning of implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991;20:40-42.
13. Pierro VS, de Souza IP, Luiz RR, Barcelos R, Moraes RS. Reliability of two methods for measurement of alveolar bone level in children. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:34-39.
14. Dantas JA, Montebello Filho A, Campos PS. Computed tomography for dental implants: The influence of the gantry angle and mandibular positioning on the bone height and width. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005;34:9-15.
15. Al-Ekrish AA, Ekram M. A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40:67-75.
16. https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/foundation.pdf 2011; Synapse Product Data version 3.2.1 Foundation Technologies: Fujifilm Medical Systems USA, Inc. Stamford, CT, USA.
17. Lofthag-Hansen S, Thilander-Klang A, Ekestubbe A, Helmrot E, Grondahl K. Calculating effective dose on a cone beam computed tomography device: 3D Accuitomo and 3D Accuitomo FPD. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:72-79.
18. Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, et al. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:267-271.
19. Stratemann SA, Huang JC, Maki K, Miller AJ, Hatcher DC. Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2008;37:80-93.
20. Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM. Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004;33:291-294.
21. Panzarella FK, Junqueira JL, Oliveira LB, de Araújo NS, Costa C. Accuracy assessment of the axial images obtained from cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40:369-378.
22. Baumgaertel S, Palomo JM, Palomo L, Hans MG. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:19-25; discussion 25-28.
23. Wyatt CC, Pharoah MJ. Imaging techniques and image interpretation for dental implant treatment. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:442-452.
24. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:228-231.
25. Kamburoglu K, Kiliç C, Ozen T, Yüksel SP. Measurements of mandibular canal region obtained by cone-beam computed tomography: A cadaveric study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107:e34-e42.
26. Torres MG, Campos PS, Segundo NP, Navarro M, Crusoé-Rebello I. Accuracy of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes. Implant Dent 2012;21:150-155.
27. Frei C, Buser D, Dula K. Study on the necessity for cross-section imaging of the posterior mandible for treatment planning of standard cases in implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:490-497.
28. Sakakura CE, Morais JA, Loffredo LC, Scaf G. A survey of radiographic prescription in dental implant assessment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2003;32:397-400.
29. Sanderink GC, Visser WN, Kramers EW. The origin of a case of severe image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991;20:169-171.
30. Rushton VE, Horner K, Worthington HV. The quality of panoramic radiographs in a sample of general dental practices. Br Dent J 1999;186:630-633.
31. Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B. Measurements of distances related to the mandibular canal in radiographs. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:96-103.
32. Rouas P, Nancy J, Bar D. Identification of double mandibular canals: Literature review and three case reports with CT scans and cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007;36:34-38.
33. Kieser JA, Paulin M, Law B. Intrabony course of the inferior alveolar nerve in the edentulous mandible. Clin Anat 2004;17:107-111.
34. Uchida Y, Noguchi N, Goto M, et al. Measurement of anterior loop length for the mandibular canal and diameter of the mandibular incisive canal to avoid nerve damage when installing endosseous implants in the interforaminal region: A second attempt introducing cone beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:744-750.
35. Greenstein G, Tarnow D. The mental foramen and nerve: Clinical and anatomical factors related to dental implant placement: A literature review. J Periodontol 2006;77:1933-1943.
36. Naitoh M, Yoshida K, Nakahara K, Gotoh K, Ariji E. Demonstration of the accessory mental foramen using rotational panoramic radiography compared with cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:1415-1419.