» Articles » PMID: 30112833

Accuracy of Cone-beam Computed Tomography, Dental Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Intraoral Radiography for Detecting Peri-implant Bone Defects at Single Zirconia Implants-An in Vitro Study

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2018 Aug 17
PMID 30112833
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic value of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), intraoral radiography (IR), and dental magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) for detecting and classifying peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants.

Materials And Methods: Forty-eight zirconia implants were inserted in bovine ribs, 24 of which had standardized defects (1-wall, 2-wall, 3-wall, 4-wall) in two sizes (1 and 3 mm). CBCT, IR, and dMRI were performed and analyzed twice by four readers unaware of the nature of the defects. Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa (κ), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for the presence/absence of bone defects, defect size, and defect type. Cochran's Q-test with post hoc McNemar was used to test for statistical differences.

Results: A high intra- and inter-reader reliability (κ range: 0.832-1) and sensitivity/specificity (IR: 0.97/0.96; CBCT: 0.99/1; dMRI: 1/0.99) for bone defect detection were observed for all three imaging methods. For defect type classification, intra- (κ range: 0.505-0.778) and inter-reader (κ: 0.411) reliability of IR were lower compared to CBCT (κ range intrareader: 0.667-0.889; κ inter-reader: 0.629) and dMRI (κ range intrareader: 0.61-0.832; κ inter-reader: 0.712). The sensitivity for correct defect type classification was not significantly different for CBCT (0.81) and dMRI (0.83; p = 1), but was significantly lower for IR (0.68; vs. CBCT p = 0.003; vs. dMRI p = 0.004). The sensitivity advantage of CBCT and dMRI for defect classification was smaller for 1-mm defects (CBCT/dMRI/IR: 0.68/0.72/0.63, no significant difference) than for 3-mm defects (CBCT/dMRI/IR: 0.95/0.94/0.74; CBCT vs. IR p = 0.0001; dMRI vs. IR p = 0.003).

Conclusion: Within the limitations of an in vitro study, IR can be recommended as the initial imaging method for evaluating peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants. CBCT provides higher diagnostic accuracy of defect classification at the expense of higher cost and radiation dose. Dental MRI may be a promising imaging method for evaluating peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants in the future.

Citing Articles

Efficacy of two radiographic algorithms for detection of peri-implant bone defects on cone-beam computed tomography scans.

Yousefi F, Heidari A, Ehsani A, Farhadian M, Ehsani M BMC Oral Health. 2025; 25(1):39.

PMID: 39773233 PMC: 11708108. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-05397-x.


Evaluation of the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the detection of peri-implant fenestration.

Gholampour A, Mollaei M, Ehsani H, Ghobadi F, Hosseinnataj A, Yazdani M BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):922.

PMID: 39123157 PMC: 11316301. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04674-z.


In Vitro Handling Characteristics of a Particulate Bone Substitute for Ridge Preservation Procedures.

Dahl S, Klar-Quarz V, Schulz A, Karl M, Grobecker-Karl T Materials (Basel). 2024; 17(2).

PMID: 38255481 PMC: 10817230. DOI: 10.3390/ma17020313.


Phantom study for CT artifacts of dental titanium implants and zirconia upper structures: the effects of occlusal plane angle setting and SEMAR algorithm.

Kitami R, Izumi M, Taniguchi M, Kozai Y, Sakurai T Oral Radiol. 2023; 40(2):251-258.

PMID: 38146041 DOI: 10.1007/s11282-023-00730-6.


Zirconia implants interfere with the evaluation of peri-implant bone defects in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images even with artifact reduction, a pilot study.

Kuusisto N, Abushahba F, Syrjanen S, Huumonen S, Vallittu P, Narhi T Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2023; 52(8):20230252.

PMID: 37641961 PMC: 10968758. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20230252.