Assessment of peri-implant defects at titanium and zirconium dioxide implants by means of periapical radiographs and cone beam computed tomography: An in-vitro examination

被引:19
|
作者
Steiger-Ronay, Valerie [1 ]
Krcmaric, Zvonimir
Schmidlin, Patrick R. [1 ]
Sahrmann, Philipp [1 ]
Wiedemeier, Daniel B. [2 ]
Benic, Goran I. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zurich, Clin Prevent Dent Periodontol & Cariol, Ctr Dent Med, Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Univ Zurich, Stat Serv, Ctr Dent Med, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Univ Zurich, Clin Fixed & Removable Prosthodont & Dent Mat Sci, Ctr Dent Med, Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
bone; bone defect; computed tomography; cone beam computed tomography; dental implant; digital; periapical radiography; peri-implantitis; radiology; scan; titanium; titanium implant; X-ray; zirconium dioxide; zirconium dioxide implant; DENTAL IMPLANTS; BONE LEVEL; ARTIFACTS; ACCURACY; WORKSHOP; DISEASES; CBCT;
D O I
10.1111/clr.13383
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective To test the accuracy of measurement of interproximal peri-implant bone defects at titanium (Ti) and zirconium dioxide (ZrO2) implants by digital periapical radiography (PR) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Material and methods A total of 18 models, each containing one Ti and one ZrO2 implant, were cast in dental stone. Six models each were allocated to following defect groups: A-no peri-implant defect, B-1 mm width defect, C-1.5 mm width defect. The defect width was measured with a digital sliding caliper. Subsequently, the models were scanned by means of PR and CBCT. Three examiners assessed the defect width on PR and CBCT. Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were applied to detect differences between imaging techniques and implant types. Results For PR, the deviation of the defect width measurement (mm) for groups A, B, and C amounted to 0.01 +/- 0.03, -0.02 +/- 0.06, and -0.00 +/- 0.04 at Ti and 0.05 +/- 0.02, 0.01 +/- 0.03, and 0.09 +/- 0.03 at ZrO2 implants. The corresponding values (mm) for CBCT reached 0.10 +/- 0.11, 0.26 +/- 0.05, and 0.24 +/- 0.08 at Ti and 1.07 +/- 0.06, 0.64 +/- 0.37, and 0.54 +/- 0.17 at ZrO2 implants. Except for Ti with defect A, measurements in PR were significantly more accurate in comparison to CBCT (p <= 0.05). Both methods generally yielded more accurate measurements for Ti than for ZrO2. Conclusions The assessment of interproximal peri-implant defect width at Ti and ZrO2 implants was more accurate in PR in comparison to CBCT. Measurements in CBCT always led to an overestimation of the defect width, reaching clinical relevance for ZrO2 implants.
引用
收藏
页码:1195 / 1201
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of the amount of artifacts induced by zirconium and titanium implants in cone-beam computed tomography images
    Shokri, Abbas
    Vafaee, Fariborz
    Haghighat, Leila
    Shahabi, Shiva
    Farhadian, Maryam
    Jamalpour, Mohammad Reza
    BMC MEDICAL IMAGING, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [42] Measuring peri-implant bone lesions using low-dose cone-beam computed tomography
    Leisner, Laura Christine
    Tasaka, Akinori
    Trebing, Charlotte Theresa
    Hilgenfeld, Tim
    Kosinski, Matthias Adalbert
    Kronsteiner, Dorothea
    Rammelsberg, Peter
    Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2022, 66 (02) : 326 - 332
  • [43] Effect of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Field of View and Acquisition Frame on the Detection of Chemically Simulated Peri-Implant Bone Loss In Vitro
    Pinheiro, Lucas Rodrigues
    Scarfe, William C.
    de Oliveira Sales, Marcelo Augusto
    Gaia, Bruno Felipe
    Gonzalez Cortes, Arthur Rodriguez
    Cavalcanti, Marcelo Gusmao
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2015, 86 (10) : 1159 - 1165
  • [44] Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography, dental magnetic resonance imaging, and intraoral radiography for detecting peri-implant bone defects at single zirconia implantsAn in vitro study
    Hilgenfeld, Tim
    Juerchott, Alexander
    Deisenhofer, Ulrich Karl
    Krisam, Johannes
    Rammelsberg, Peter
    Heiland, Sabine
    Bendszus, Martin
    Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2018, 29 (09) : 922 - 930
  • [45] Accuracy of peri-implant bone thickness and validity of assessing bone augmentation material using cone beam computed tomography
    Wang, Dongyun
    Kuenzel, Andreas
    Golubovic, Vladimir
    Mihatovic, Ilya
    John, Gordon
    Chen, Zhuofan
    Becker, Juergen
    Schwarz, Frank
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2013, 17 (06) : 1601 - 1609
  • [46] Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in assessing peri-implant bone defect regeneration: a histologically controlled study in dogs
    Fienitz, Tim
    Schwarz, Frank
    Ritter, Lutz
    Dreiseidler, Timo
    Becker, Juergen
    Rothamel, Daniel
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2012, 23 (07) : 882 - 887
  • [47] Peri-implant bone tissue assessment by comparing the outcome of intra-oral radiograph and cone beam computed tomography analyses to the histological standard
    Corpas, Livia dos Santos
    Jacobs, Reinhilde
    Quirynen, Marc
    Huang, Yan
    Naert, Ignace
    Duyck, Joke
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2011, 22 (05) : 492 - 499
  • [48] Accuracy of peri-implant bone thickness and validity of assessing bone augmentation material using cone beam computed tomography
    Dongyun Wang
    Andreas Künzel
    Vladimir Golubovic
    Ilya Mihatovic
    Gordon John
    Zhuofan Chen
    Jürgen Becker
    Frank Schwarz
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2013, 17 : 1601 - 1609
  • [49] Radiographic Assessment of Cleft Alveolar Bone Defects: A Preliminary Comparison of Periapical and Cone Beam Computed Tomography Images
    Guo, Yiou
    De Brito, Kiersten C. Woodyard
    Gosnell, Elizabeth S.
    Sun, Qin
    Wang, Jue
    CLEFT PALATE CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL, 2023,
  • [50] Accuracy of peri-implant bone thickness and validity of assessing bone augmentation material using cone beam computed tomography—is this correct?
    Siamak Sabour
    Elahe Vahid Dastjerdi
    Maryam Moezizadeh
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2013, 17 : 1785 - 1785