» Articles » PMID: 20173717

The Evaluation of Digital Panoramic Radiographs Taken for Implant Dentistry in the Daily Practice

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2010 Feb 23
PMID 20173717
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: This study was conducted 1/ to find out the effects of anatomical sites and implant types on the magnification and 2/ to evaluate the inter-observer variability on the evaluation using the digital panoramas taken at daily practices.

Study Design: Panoramic radiographs from 156 patients treated with implants were evaluated by three observers. The length was measured on the lateral aspect of the implant in 1:1 mode using image measurement program and the percent magnification was calculated. The inter-observer correlation coefficient was measured to express inter-observer variability using reliability analysis-scale.

Results: The average magnification factor in the panoramic radiograph was 126.8 % in the vertical plane. Location within the anatomic arch showed different magnification by a minimum of 119.4 to a maximum of 130.8 %. The measurements among three examiners were well correlated showing correlation coefficient of 0.81. The differences between one side from the contralateral side was evaluated and it was shown that the differences were observed only seen maxillary anterior and upper premolar regions. Additionally, the external non-submerged group had the highest magnification value.

Conclusions: Digital panoramic radiographs showed sufficient accuracy and good inter-examiner agreement. The radiographic magnification of implant length was influenced by anatomical sites and implant types.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Dental Panoramic Radiography and CBCT for Measuring Vertical Bone Height in Different Horizontal Locations of Posterior Mandibular Alveolar Process.

Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Abolvardi M, Akhlaghian M, Paknahad M J Dent (Shiraz). 2018; 19(2):83-91.

PMID: 29854881 PMC: 5960739.


The magnification in the lower third and second molar region in the digital panoramic radiographs.

Trakiniene G, Sidlauskas A, Svalkauskiene V, Smailiene D, Urbone J J Forensic Dent Sci. 2017; 9(2):91-95.

PMID: 29263614 PMC: 5717779. DOI: 10.4103/jfo.jfds_48_16.


The comparison of the precision of different dental radiographic methods in mandibular peri-implantary measurements: an in vitro study.

Bilhan H, Geckili O, Arat Bilhan S, Aycicek F, Albayrak B, Bozbulut P J Istanb Univ Fac Dent. 2017; 49(1):1-9.

PMID: 28955519 PMC: 5573457. DOI: 10.17096/jiufd.55134.


Oral Implant Imaging: A Review.

Gupta S, Patil N, Solanki J, Singh R, Laller S Malays J Med Sci. 2015; 22(3):7-17.

PMID: 26715891 PMC: 4681716.


Measurement for natural dental neck data of normal adults and its clinical significance on guiding implant restoration.

Sun M, Gu F, Wang J, Zhou C, Xia J, Qin H Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8(9):14732-40.

PMID: 26628955 PMC: 4658844.