http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Prevalence of dental implant positioning errors: A cross-sectional study
Rizzo Gabriel,Prado Mayara Colpo,Rigo Lilian 대한영상치의학회 2022 Imaging Science in Dentistry Vol.52 No.4
Purpose: This study evaluated the prevalence of dental implant positioning errors and the most frequently affected oral regions. Materials and Methods: A sample was obtained of CBCT images of 590 dental implants from 230 individuals who underwent diagnosis at a radiology center using cone-beam computed tomography from 2017 to 2020. The following variables were considered: thread exposure, violation of the minimum distance between 2 adjacent implants and between the implant and tooth, and implant contact with anatomical structures. Descriptive data analysis and the Pearson chi-square test (P<0.05) were performed to compare findings according to mouth regions. Results: Most (74.4%) of the 590 implants were poorly positioned, with the posterior region of the maxilla being the region most frequently affected by errors. Among the variables analyzed, the most prevalent was thread exposure (54.7%), followed by implant contact with anatomical structures, violation of the recommended distance between 2 implants and violation of the recommended distance between the implant and teeth. Thread exposure was significantly associated with the anterior region of the mandible (P<0.05). The anterior region of the maxilla was associated with violation of the recommended tooth-implant distance (P<0.05) and the recommended distance between 2 adjacent implants (P<0.05). Implant contact with anatomical structures was significantly more likely to occur in the posterior region of the maxilla (P<0.05). Conclusion: Many implants were poorly positioned in the posterior region of the maxilla. Thread exposure was particularly frequent and was significantly associated with the anterior region of the mandible.
Prevalence of dental implant positioning errors: A cross-sectional study
Gabriel, Rizzo,Mayara Colpo, Prado,Lilian, Rigo Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2022 Imaging Science in Dentistry Vol.52 No.-
Purpose: This study evaluated the prevalence of dental implant positioning errors and the most frequently affected oral regions. Materials and Methods: A sample was obtained of CBCT images of 590 dental implants from 230 individuals who underwent diagnosis at a radiology center using cone-beam computed tomography from 2017 to 2020. The following variables were considered: thread exposure, violation of the minimum distance between 2 adjacent implants and between the implant and tooth, and implant contact with anatomical structures. Descriptive data analysis and the Pearson chi-square test(P<0.05) were performed to compare findings according to mouth regions. Results: Most (74.4%) of the 590 implants were poorly positioned, with the posterior region of the maxilla being the region most frequently affected by errors. Among the variables analyzed, the most prevalent was thread exposure (54.7%), followed by implant contact with anatomical structures, violation of the recommended distance between 2 implants and violation of the recommended distance between the implant and teeth. Thread exposure was significantly associated with the anterior region of the mandible (P<0.05). The anterior region of the maxilla was associated with violation of the recommended tooth-implant distance (P<0.05) and the recommended distance between 2 adjacent implants(P<0.05). Implant contact with anatomical structures was significantly more likely to occur in the posterior region of the maxilla (P<0.05). Conclusion: Many implants were poorly positioned in the posterior region of the maxilla. Thread exposure was particularly frequent and was significantly associated with the anterior region of the mandible.
Giorgia Tedesco,Mirko D’Onofrio3,Alessandro Sarno,Giulio Rizzo,Annamaria Grecchi,Ilaria Testa,Gabriele Giannott 대한초음파의학회 2019 ULTRASONOGRAPHY Vol.38 No.4
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a relatively novel, but increasingly used, diagnostic imaging modality. In recent years, due to its safety, quickness, and repeatability, several studies have demonstrated the accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of CEUS. The European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology has recently updated the previous guidelines from 2012 for the use of CEUS in non-hepatic applications. This review deals with the clinical use and applications of CEUS for the evaluation of non-hepatic abdominal organs, focusing on renal, splenic, and pancreatic applications.