SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Selcuk Dental Journal / 2026 / Volume: 11 Issue: 2

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Panoramic Radiography in Determining Dental Implant Length

Dental İmplant Uzunluğunun Belirlenmesinde Panoramik Radyografi Etkinliğinin Değerlendirilmesi

Ahmet Aktı(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-3447-0065
Uğur Dolunay(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0003-2150-9124
Gökhan Gürses(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-3825-4650
Hasan Küçükkolbaşı(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-7769-8537
Merve Alıç(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0009-0003-7732-0838
Muslu Kazım Körez(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ, TEMEL TIP BİLİMLERİ BÖLÜMÜ, BİYOİSTATİSTİK VE TIBBİ BİLİŞİM ANABİLİM DALI)0000-0001-9524-6115
Pages
—
Publication Date
2024-08-19
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results indicate a high level of concordance between the planned and actual implant lengths.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction Panoramic radiographs are frequently used as a radiographic method in the evaluation and preparation of treatment protocols before dental implant procedures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods In this study, the records of 568 patients who applied to our clinic for dental implant treatment between March 2023 and February 2024 were examined.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicate a high level of concordance between the planned and actual implant lengths.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:dental implant · panoramic radiography · radiological examination

Abstract

Introduction Panoramic radiographs are frequently used as a radiographic method in the evaluation and preparation of treatment protocols before dental implant procedures. The aim of this retrospective study is to examine the correlation between the preoperatively planned implant lengths determined on panoramic radiographic images and the actual placed implant lengths in patients who received dental implants in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions. Additionally, the study aims to evaluate the reliability and adequacy of panoramic radiography in this context. Materials and Methods In this study, the records of 568 patients who applied to our clinic for dental implant treatment between March 2023 and February 2024 were examined. Patients who received implants in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions and had preoperative panoramic radiographs were included in the study. Patients were excluded if their radiographic images contained artifacts that hindered length measurements, if angled implants were placed, or if they underwent external and internal sinus lifting or vertical augmentation. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 23 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) software. Results A total of 443 dental implants were included in the study, involving 234 patients. The gender distribution of the sample consisted of 54% (n=126) female and 46% (n=108) male patients. Of the implants, 46.7% (n=207) were placed in the maxillary posterior region, and 53.3% (n=236) were placed in the mandibular posterior region. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the concordance between planned and placed implant lengths was found to be 0.9014. This ICC was measured at 0.9036 among male patients and 0.9 among female patients. These results indicate a high level of concordance between the planned and actual implant lengths. Conclusion Panoramic radiography can be considered a simple, accessible, and useful tool in determining implant length before dental implant treatment. However, advanced radiographic examinations such as cone-beam computed tomography may also be necessary for more consistent implant treatment planning.

Özet

Giriş: Panoramik radyografiler, dental implant tedavisi öncesi değerlendirme ve tedavi protokollerinin hazırlanmasında radyografik bir yöntem olarak sıklıkla kullanılmaktadır. Bu retrospektif çalışmanın amacı, maksiller ve mandibular posterior bölgeye dental implant yapılmış hastalarda, preoperatif panoramik radyografik görüntüler üzerinde yapılan planlamaya göre belirlenen implant boyları ile yerleştirilmiş implant boyları arasındaki korelasyonu incelemek ve panoramik radyografinin bu kapsamda güvenilirliğini ve yeterliliğini değerlendirmektir. Materyal ve Metod: Çalışmada, Mart 2023 ile Şubat 2024 tarihleri arasında dental implant tedavisi için kliniğimize başvuran 568 hastanın dosyası incelenmiştir. Bu bağlamda, maksiller ve mandibular posterior bölgeye implant yapılmış ve preoperatif panoramik radyografisi olan hastalar çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Radyografik görüntülerde uzunluk ölçümünü engelleyen artefaktlar bulunan, açılı implant yapılmış, eksternal ve internal sinüs lifting yapılmış hastalar ve vertikal augmentasyon yapılmış hastalar çalışma dışı bırakılmıştır. İstatiksel analizler için SPSS 23 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) yazılımı kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Çalışmaya, toplamda 234 hastada 443 dental implant dahil edilmiştir. Örneklemdeki hastaların cinsiyet dağılımı, %54'si (n=126) kadın ve %46’si (n=108) erkek hastadan oluşmaktadır. İmplantların %46,7’si (n=207) maksiller posterior %53,3’si (n=236) mandibular posterior bölgeye uygulanmıştır. Planlanan implant boyları ile yapılmış implantlar arasındaki intraclass correlation coefficient uyum katsayısı 0,9014 olarak bulunmuştur. Erkekler arasında bu oran 0,9036; kadınlar arasında 0,9 olarak ölçülmüştür. Bu sonuçlar, planlanan ve uygulanan implant boyları arasında yüksek düzeyde bir uyum olduğunu göstermektedir. Sonuç: Panoramik radyografi, dental implant tedavisi öncesinde implant uzunluğunun belirlenmesinde basit, kolay ulaşılabilir ve yararlı bir araç olarak kabul edilebilir. Ancak planlamayla daha uyumlu implant tedavisi için konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi gibi ileri radyografik tetkiklere de ihtiyaç bulunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aktı, A., Dolunay, U., Gürses, G., Küçükkolbaşı, H., Alıç, M., Körez, M. K. (2024). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Panoramic Radiography in Determining Dental Implant Length. Selcuk Dental Journal, Volume: 11 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1506859

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. McDavid, W. D., Dove, S. B., Welander, U., & Tronje, G. Dimensional reproduction in direct digital rotational panoramic radiography. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology. 1993;5(4):523-527.
  2. Sakakura, C. E., de Castro Monteiro Loffredo, L., & Scaf, G. Diagnostic agreement of conventional and inverted scanned panoramic radiographs in the detection of the mandibular canal and the mental foramen. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2004;30(1):2-6.
  3. Tatum Jr, H. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dental Clinics of North America.1986;30(2):207-229.
  4. Clark D, Barbu H, Lorean A, Mijiritsky E, Levin L. Incidental findings of implant complications on postimplantation CBCTs: A cross-sectional study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19:776–782.
  5. Park, J.-B.The evaluation of digital panoramic radiographs taken for implant dentistry in the daily practice. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010;15(4):663-666.
  6. Yim, J.-h., Ryu, D.-m., Lee, B.-s., & Kwon, Y.-d. Analysis of digitalized panorama and cone beam computed tomographic image distortion for the diagnosis of dental implant surgery. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2011;22(2):669-673.
  7. Tsiklakis K, Mitsea A, Tsichlaki A, Pandis N. A systematic review of relative indications and contra-indications for prescribing panoramic radiographs in dental paediatric patients. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2020;21: 387–406.
  8. JAMIL, Firas A., et al. The reliability of surgeons to avoid traumatic insertion of dental implants into high-risk regions: a panoramic radiograph study. BMC Oral Health, 2020;20:1-6.
  9. Cho, Y. Diagnostic value of dental CT (DentaScan) in dental implant. Chungbuk Med J. 1998;8:11-19.
  10. Carmichael, F., Hirschmann, P., Scaife, B., Sheard, L., & Mackenzie, A. A comparison of the diagnostic utility of two image receptors for panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2000;29(1):57-60.
  11. Schropp, L., Stavropoulos, A., Gotfredsen, E., & Wenzel, A. Comparison of panoramic and conventional cross‐sectional tomography for preoperative selection of implant size. Clinical oral implants research. 2011;22(4):424-429.
  12. SALIAN, Shrishti S., et al. Radiographic Evaluation in Implant Patients: A Review. Cureus, 2024;16.2.
  13. Resnik, R. R., & Misch, C. E. Radiographic imaging in implant dentistry. Dental Implant Prosthetics. 2015;126-158.
  14. Harris, D., Horner, K., Gröndahl, K., Jacobs, R., Helmrot, E., Benic, G. I., Bornstein, M. M., Dawood, A., & Quirynen, M. EAO guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clinical oral implants research. 2012; 23(11):1243-1253.
  15. Ludlow, J. B., Davies-Ludlow, L. E., & White, S. C. Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: the impact of 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection recommendations regarding dose calculation. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2008;139(9):1237-1243.
  16. 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. Clinical oral implants research. 2004;15(4), 490-497.
  17. Hardy, T. C., Suri, L., & Stark, P. Influence of patient head positioning on measured axial tooth inclination in panoramic radiography. Journal of Orthodontics. 2009;36(2), 103-110.
  18. Xie, Q., Wolf, J., & Ainamo, A. (1997). Quantitative assessment of vertical heights of maxillary and mandibular bones in panoramic radiographs of elderly dentate and edentulous subjects. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 1997;55(3):155-161.
  19. Larheim, T., & Svanaes, D. Reproducibility of rotational panoramic radiography: mandibular linear dimensions and angles. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1986;90(1):45-51.
  20. Kim, Y., Park, J., Kim, S., Kim, J., & Kim, J. Magnification rate of digital panoramic radiographs and its effectiveness for pre-operative assessment of dental implants. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2011;40(2):76-83.
  21. Schropp, L., Stavropoulos, A., Gotfredsen, E., & Wenzel, A. Calibration of radiographs by a reference metal ball affects preoperative selection of implant size. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2009;13:375-381.
  22. Akdeniz, B. G., Okşan, T., Kovanlikaya, I., & Genç, I. Evaluation of bone height and bone density by computed tomography and panoramic radiography for implant recipient sites. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2000;26(2):114-119.
  23. Vazquez, L., Saulacic, N., Belser, U., & Bernard, J. P. (2008). Efficacy of panoramic radiographs in the preoperative planning of posterior mandibular implants: a prospective clinical study of 1527 consecutively treated patients. Clinical oral implants research. 2008; 19(1):81-85.
  24. Apaydın, B. K., Yasar, F., Kizildağ, A., & Tasdemir, O. Accuracy of digital panoramic radiographs on the vertical measurements of dental implants. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. 2018;21(3):209-215.
  25. Carmichael, F., Hirschmann, P., Scaife, B., Sheard, L., & Mackenzie, A. A comparison of the diagnostic utility of two image receptors for panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2000;29(1):57-60.