Reliability of two different presurgical preparation methods for implant dentistry based on panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in cadavers

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Purpose: Special care is necessary to avoid invading important anatomic structures during surgery when presurgical planning is made based on radiographs. However, none of these types of radiography represents a perfect modality. The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of presurgical planning based on the use of two types of radiographic image (digital panoramic radiography [DPR] and cone-beam computed tomography [CBCT]) by beginner dentists to place implants, and to quantify differences in measurements between radiographic images and real specimens.
Methods: Ten fresh cadavers without posterior teeth were used, and twelve practitioners who had no experience of implant surgery performed implant surgery after 10 hours of basic instruction using conventional surgical guide based on CBCT or DPR. Two types of measurement error were evaluated: 1) the presurgical measurement error, defined as that between the presurgical and postsurgical measurements in each modality of radiographic analysis, and 2) the measurement error between postsurgical radiography and the real specimen.
Results: The mean presurgical measurement error was significantly smaller for CBCT than for DPR in the maxillary region, whereas it did not differ significantly between the two imaging modalities in the mandibular region. The mean measurement error between radiography and real specimens was significantly smaller for CBCT than for DPR in the maxillary region, but did not differ significantly in the mandibular region.
Conclusions: Presurgical planning can be performed safely using DPR in the mandible; however, presurgical planning using CBCT is recommended in the maxilla when a structure in a buccolingual location needs to be evaluated because this imaging modality supplies buccolingual information that cannot be obtained from DPR.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Lindh C, "Visualisation of the mandibular canal by different radiographic techniques" 3 : 90-97, 1992

2 Peker I, "The use of 3 different imaging methods for the localization of the mandibular canal in dental implant planning" 23 : 463-470, 2008

3 Frei C, "Study on the necessity for cross-section imaging of the posterior mandible for treatment planning of standard cases in implant dentistry" 15 : 490-497, 2004

4 Tyndall DA, "Selection criteria for dental implant site imaging: a position paper of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial radiology" 89 : 630-637, 2000

5 Hanazawa T, "Radiologic measurements of the mandible: a comparison between CT-reformatted and conventional tomographic images" 15 : 226-232, 2004

6 Bolin A, "Radiographic evaluation of mandibular posterior implant sites: correlation between panoramic and tomographic determinations" 7 : 354-359, 1996

7 Albrektsson T, "Osseointegrated oral implants: a Swedish multicenter study of 8139 consecutively inserted Nobelpharma implants" 59 : 287-296, 1988

8 Lindh C, "Measurements of distances related to the mandibular canal in radiographs" 6 : 96-103, 1995

9 Misch CE, "Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference" 17 : 5-15, 2008

10 Reiskin AB, "Implant imaging: status, controversies, and new developments" 42 : 47-56, 1998

11 Scaf G, "Dosimetry and cost of imaging osseointegrated implants with film-based and computed tomography" 83 : 41-48, 1997

12 Spector L, "Computer-aided dental implant planning" 52 : 761-775, 2008

13 Kobayashi K, "Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography" 19 : 228-231, 2004

14 Sunden S, "Accuracy and precision in the radiographic diagnosis of clinical instability in Branemark dental implants" 6 : 220-226, 1995

15 Stella JP, "A precise radiographic method to determine the location of the inferior alveolar canal in the posterior edentulous mandible: implications for dental implants. Part 2: Clinical application" 5 : 23-29, 1990

16 Mozzo P, "A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results" 8 : 1558-1564, 1998

17 Van de Velde T, "A model study on flapless implant placement by clinicians with a different experience level in implant surgery" 19 : 66-72, 2008

18 Reddy MS, "A comparison of the diagnostic advantages of panoramic radiography and computed tomography scanning for placement of root form dental implants" 5 : 229-238, 1994

19 Tal H, "A comparison of panoramic radiography with computed tomography in the planning of implant surgery" 20 : 40-42, 1991

20 Hashimoto K, "A comparison of a new limited cone beam computed tomography machine for dental use with a multidetector row helical CT machine" 95 : 371-377, 2003

21 Al-Ekrish AA, "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" 40 : 67-75, 2011

22 Hong YH, "A case of massive maxillary sinus bleeding after dental implant" 40 : 758-760, 2011

23 Cho-Lee GY, "A 12-year retrospective analytic study of the implant survival rate in 177 consecutive maxillary sinus augmentation procedures" 25 : 1019-1027, 2010