SavedAdd your journal

Journals / 7tepe Klinik / 2016 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2

The comparison of panoramic radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography for vertical bone height in maxillary posterior area

Maksiller posterior bölgede vertikal kemik yüksekliği ölçümlerinde konik-ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi ve panoramik radyografi yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması

Seray KEÇELİ
MEHMET CENK HAYTAÇ
MUSTAFA ÖZCAN
Pages
39–46
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Conclusions: Panoromic radiographs can be considered as a reliable imaging technique which is easier, faster, cheaper and having low-dose of radiation compared to CBCT.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The present study aimed to compare panoramic radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) regarding vertical bone height measurements in posterior maxilla for implant treatment planning.Materials and methods: Two independent clinicians measured the residual bone height on the panoromic and CBCT images of 99 patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In addition the presence of sinus septa was evaluated in this retrospective analysis.Results: The data has shown that panoromic radiographs and CBCT technique had an excellent-good correlation (r=0.94) on the measurements of vertical bone height between maxillary sinus and alveolar bone.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: Panoromic radiographs can be considered as a reliable imaging technique which is easier, faster, cheaper and having low-dose of radiation compared to CBCT.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The present study aimed to compare panoramic radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) regarding vertical bone height measurements in posterior maxilla for implant treatment planning.Materials and methods: Two independent clinicians measured the residual bone height on the panoromic and CBCT images of 99 patients. In addition the presence of sinus septa was evaluated in this retrospective analysis.Results: The data has shown that panoromic radiographs and CBCT technique had an excellent-good correlation (r=0.94) on the measurements of vertical bone height between maxillary sinus and alveolar bone. In addition, almost half of the septa detected on CBCT images could not be observed on panoromic radiographs. Conclusions: Panoromic radiographs can be considered as a reliable imaging technique which is easier, faster, cheaper and having low-dose of radiation compared to CBCT.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, üst çene posterior bölgede alveolar kemik seviyesi saptamada ve implant planlamalarında kullanılan panoramik radyografiler ile konik-ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) görüntüleme tekniklerinin vertikal kemik yüksekliği ölçümlerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Retrospektif olarak yapılan bu çalışmada 99 hastanın maksiller posterior bölgesindeki rezidüel kemik yüksekliği panoromik ve KIBT ile iki ayrı araştırmacı tarafından ölçülerek karşılaştırılmıştır. Aynı zamanda her iki teknikle alınan radyografilerde sinüs septa varlığı da değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: Maksiller sinüs ile alveolar kret arası vertikal kemik yüksekliği ölçümlerinde panoramik radyografi ve KIBT değerleri arasında mükemmel-iyi bir korelasyon (r=0.94) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca KIBT'de tespit edilen septaların yaklaşık yarısı panoromik radyograflarda gözlenememiştir.Sonuç: Panoramik radyografi; posterior maksiller bölgede rutin implant uygulamaları öncesinde güvenli bir görüntüleme yöntemi olarak düşünülebilir. Bu yöntem KIBT'ye göre ucuz, hızlı, kolay ve düşük radyasyon dozuna sahiptir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KEÇELİ, S., HAYTAÇ, M. C., ÖZCAN, M. (2016). The comparison of panoramic radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography for vertical bone height in maxillary posterior area. 7tepe Klinik, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2, 39–46. https://ajindex.com/articles/149882

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Gruber H, Solar P, Ulm C. Maxillomandibular anatomy and patterns of resorption during atrophy. Edosseous Implants: Scientific and clinical aspects. Berlin: Quintessence. 1996:29-63
  2. Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study. J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23(1):48-55
  3. Thomas A, Raman R. A comparative study of the pneumatization of the mastoid air cells and the frontal and maxillary sinuses. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1989;10(5 suppl):S88-S88
  4. Misch L, Misch C. Denture satisfaction--a patient perspective. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;7(2):43
  5. Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R. Systematic review of survival rates for implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(3):266
  6. Emmerich D, Att W, Stappert C. Sinus floor elevation using osteotomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Periodontol 2005;76(8):1237-1251
  7. Temmerman A, Hertelé S, Teughels W, Dekeyser C, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. Are panoramic images reliable in planning sinus augmentation procedures? Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22(2):189-194
  8. Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topography and related root position of posterior teeth using panoramic and cross-sectional computed tomography imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;102(3):375-381
  9. Beason R, Brooks S. Preoperative implant site assessment in southeast Michigan. J Dent Res 2001;80:137
  10. Harris D, Buser D, Dula K, et al. EAO guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13(5):566-570
  11. Nedbalski TR, Laskin DM. Use of panoramic radiography to predict possible maxillary sinus membrane perforation during dental extraction. Quintessence Int 2008;39(8)
  12. 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(1):81-85
  13. Kaya Y, Sencimen M, Sahin S, Okcu KM, Doan N, Bahcecitapar M. Retrospective radiographic evaluation of the anterior loop of the mental nerve: comparison between panoramic radiography and spiral computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(5)
  14. Angelopoulos C, Thomas S, Hechler S, Parissis N, Hlavacek M. Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identif