Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 37540349

Influence of CBCT-derived Panoramic Curve Variability in the Measurements for Dental Implant Planning

Overview
Journal Oral Radiol
Specialty Radiology
Date 2023 Aug 4
PMID 37540349
Authors
Cyntia Adames
Hugo Gaeta-Araujo
Ademir Franco
Mariana Quirino Silveira Soares
Jose Luiz Cintra Junqueira
Anne Caroline Oenning
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether the curve markings performed prior to panoramic and cross-sectional reconstructions can influence the planning of oral implants.

Methods: Twenty oral radiologists landmarked the reference panoramic curves in 25 CBCT scans of the mandible. Bone height was measured on the resulting cross-sectional slices in the edentulous region of the lower first molar. The following data were recorded: (1) number of landmarks used to build each reference curve; (2) shape of the reference curve (inverted "U", inverted "V" or "horseshoe"); and (3) measurement in the first molar region. The data were assessed for variability based on the number of landmarks, the shape of the reference curve, and the measurements obtained.

Results: The number of landmarks used to guide the panoramic reconstruction varied among radiologists (p < 0.05), but most of them draw curves in inverted "U" shape (68-100%). The reproducibility of the measurements taken in the edentulous mandibular first molar region was excellent (84.7%). The number of landmarks and the shape of the curve did not have a significant influence on the reproducibility of the measurements (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: Variations of the operator-dependent steps during the panoramic reconstructions occur but do not play a significant part changing the measurements taken for oral implant planning.

References
1.
Tyndall D, Price J, Tetradis S, Ganz S, Hildebolt C, Scarfe W . Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012; 113(6):817-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2012.03.005. View
2.
Wikner J, Friedrich R, Rashad A, Schulze D, Hanken H, Heiland M . Obstacles in spatial evaluation of CBCT-reformatted panoramic imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016; 45(4):20150436. PMC: 4846180. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20150436. View
3.
Papakosta T, Savva A, Economopoulos T, Matsopoulos G, Grohndal H . An automatic panoramic image reconstruction scheme from dental computed tomography images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017; 46(4):20160225. PMC: 5594999. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160225. View
4.
Akbulut A, Kilinc D . Evaluation of condyle position in patients with Angle Class I, II, and III malocclusion using cone-beam computed tomography panoramic reconstructions. Oral Radiol. 2018; 35(1):43-50. DOI: 10.1007/s11282-018-0326-z. View
5.
Pauwels R, Araki K, Siewerdsen J, Thongvigitmanee S . Technical aspects of dental CBCT: state of the art. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014; 44(1):20140224. PMC: 4277439. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140224. View