Evaluation and Comparison of Root Proximity of Maxillary and Mandibular Interradicular Sites for Mini Implant Placement Using Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2090
Author(s):  
A. Jebilla Pringle ◽  
S. Satheesh Babu ◽  
E. Rajesh ◽  
N. Anitha ◽  
N. Aravindha Babu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Root Proximity

scholarly journals Classification of Sagittal Root Position and Angulation of Premolars for Immediate Implant Placement: A Cone Beam Computed Tomography Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yalin Zhan ◽  
Miaozhen Wang ◽  
Xueyuan Cheng ◽  
Feng Liu
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Frequency Distribution ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Root Position ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
Maxillary Premolars

Abstract Background: Sagittal root position (SRP) and thickness of buccal plate were of clinical guiding significance in implant treatment planning. The study was to classify the SRP and angulations of the maxillary and mandibular premolar to each osseous housing, and to measure the thickness of buccal plate by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in order to estimate the distributions and provide clinical decision support. Methods: CBCT images was reviewed on 150 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The sagittal root position and angulations of the maxillary and mandibular premolars to their respective osseous housing were evaluated and classified using CBCT images. The thickness of buccal plate at 1 mm, 3 mm, 5 mm apical to the alveolar crest was also measured. Results: The frequency distribution of SRP types indicated that, 41.67%, 51.83%, 3.67%, and 2.83% of maxillary premolars; 84.33%, 15%, 0%, and 0.67% of mandibular premolars were classified as type B, M, L, and N. The frequency distribution of angulation classifications indicated that, 20.83%, 46%, 32.17%, and 1% of maxillary premolars; 2%, 5.33%, 36.67%, and 56% of mandibular premolars were classified as class 1, 2, 3, and 4. The buccal bone thickness in most locations of premolar sites was less than 1 mm. Conclusions: The classification of clinical relevance of SRP and angulation of the premolar root to osseous housing would help for treatment planning and improving interdisciplinary communication of immediate implant placement (IIP) in the premolar region.

scholarly journals Presurgical Cone Beam Computed Tomography Bone Quality Evaluation for Predictable Immediate Implant Placement and Restoration in Esthetic Zone

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Marilena Cristache
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Bone Quality ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Quality Evaluation ◽  
Multislice Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Lower Radiation Dose ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Immediate Implant

Despite numerous advantages over multislice computed tomography (MSCT), including a lower radiation dose to the patient, shorter acquisition times, affordable cost, and sometimes greater detail with isotropic voxels used in reconstruction, allowing precise measurements, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is still controversial regarding bone quality evaluation. This paper presents a brief review of the literature on accuracy and reliability of bone quality assessment with CBCT and a case report with step-by-step predictable treatment planning in esthetic zone, based on CBCT scans which enabled the clinician to evaluate, depending on bone volume and quality, whether immediate restoration with CAD-CAM manufactured temporary crown and flapless surgery may be a treatment option.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Cortical Bone Anatomy of Mandibular Buccal Shelf for Mini Implant Placement in Different Facial Divergence: A Cone Beam Computed Tomography Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-331
Author(s):  
Kalyani Trivedi ◽  
Bharvi K Jani ◽  
Sagar Hirani ◽  
Mansi V Radia
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Bone Surface ◽  
Bone Thickness ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Cortical Bone Thickness ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Alveolar Crest

Aim: The purpose of this study was to use measurements from cone beam computed tomography scans to quantify the cortical bone thickness of mandibular buccal shelf region and preferable site for buccal shelf implant placement in 10 hyperdivergent and 10 hypodivergent patients. Method: 20 cone beam computed tomographies were equally divided based on divergence. 6 sites were examined: mesial of first molar (6M), middle of first molar (6Mi), interdental between the first and second molar (Id), mesial of second molar (7M), middle of second molar (7Mi), and distal of second molar (7D). The study quantified the mandibular buccal shelf relative to its angle of slope, the cortical bone thickness measured perpendicular to the bone surface, the amount of cortical bone 30° angle to the bone surface. The cortical bone thickness was measured perpendicular and at a 30° angle at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the alveolar crest. Result: Significant change is seen at the buccal shelf slope at 6M ( P = .001) and further increase in this angle till 7D ( P = .003). Mean amount of cortical bone for hyperdivergent group at 7D is 4.77 ± 0.68 mm and for hypodivergent group is 3.86 ± 0.70 mm. Statistically significant differences were noted at insertion site at 90° and 30° for both groups at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the alveolar crest. Conclusion: Preferable site for buccal shelf implant placement is distal to the mandibular second molar. The maximum amount of cortical bone is found distal to the second molar 7 mm vertically from alveolar crest when the buccal shelf implant is placed at 30° angulation for hyperdivergent group.

scholarly journals ASSESSMENT OF JAW BONE DENSITY IN TERMS OF HOUNSFIELD UNITS USING CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR DENTAL IMPLANT TREATMENT PLANNING

2021 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-27
Author(s):  
Myra Ahmad ◽  
Yasir Ikram Ahmed ◽  
Farheen Qureshi ◽  
Muhammad Sharjeel Ashraf ◽  
Zubair Ahmed Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Bone Density ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Hounsfield Units ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anterior Mandible ◽  
Implant Treatment

Objective: To assess jawbone density in terms of Hounsfield units using cone beam computed tomography fordental implant treatment planning in patients reporting to a local tertiary care dental hospital Study Design: Cross sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Fatima Memorial Hospital, Lahore, from Mar to Sep 2018. Methodology: A total of 100 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria and underwent implant placement wereincluded in the study. After ethical approval, informed and written consent, brief history was taken and a singleradiographer exposed and took cone beam computed tomography scan of all the subjects using PLANMECAmachine. A single investigator using PLANMECA software recorded jawbone density in terms of Hounsfieldunits. All data were presented as mean, SD and one way ANOVA was used. Multiple comparisons of the fourregions in the maxilla and mandible were performed with a Tukey test. An independent t-test was also used tocompare gender with age groups and bone density. Results: Total of 100 patients who underwent implant placement were included, 48 (48%) were males & 52 (52%) were females with the mean age of 28.53 ± 5.33 years. The mean jawbone density in terms of Hounsfield units using cone beam computed tomography in anterior maxilla was 709.75 ± 122.63 Hounsfield units, posterior maxilla was 299.66 ± 73.09 Hounsfield units, anterior mandible was 1093.34 ± 109.42 Hounsfield units and posterior mandible was 599.45 ± 135.55 Hounsfield units (p<.001). Conclusion: The anterior mandible and anterior...........

scholarly journals Is Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Always Necessary for Dental Implant Placement?

2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Deeb ◽  
Ludmils Antonos ◽  
Samuel Tack ◽  
Caroline Carrico ◽  
Daniel Laskin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Implant Placement

Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 953-957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shameeka Thopte ◽  
Aastha Chopra ◽  
Amit A Mhapuskar ◽  
Swati Marathe ◽  
Shams U Nisa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Accurate Assessment ◽  
Bony Tissue ◽  
Apical Portion ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Radiographic Measurements ◽  
Bone Height

ABSTRACT Introduction Accurate assessment of osseointegration in dental implants requires precise radiographic visualization of pathologic conditions as well as anatomical structures. The present study aimed to evaluate the formation of bony tissue (osseointegration) using digital orthopantomogram (OPG) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) immediately after implant insertion (within 7 days) and 3 months postinsertion. Materials and methods Twenty single-implant sites on mandibular posterior regions were selected on patients irrespective of their gender. Both digital OPG and CBCT were done within a week and again after 3 months of implant insertion surgery, using the same exposure parameters. Results Three of the 20 implants were submerged and were excluded as the crestal bone height could not be measured. The participants were recalled for radiographic measurements after 3 months of implant placement. On an average, there was 0.03 mm of osseointegration at the apical portion after 3 months of implant insertion on digital OPG; 0.04 mm of osseointegration at the crestal bone height after 3 months on digital OPG; and 0.01 mm of osseointegration at the apical portion after 3 months on CBCT. No change or ≤0.02 mm of osseointegration at crestal bone height after 3 months on CBCT. Conclusion Both digital OPG and CBCT are significant for the assessment of osseointegration in implants, and hence, endow definite benefit for accurate assessment in terms of the success of the implant placement. Clinical significance However, CBCT is a better mode of evaluating dental implants but one should keep in mind that radiographic examination must be conducted to the benefit of the patient by application of the lowest achievable dose. How to cite this article Chopra A, Mhapuskar AA, Marathe S, Nisa SU, Thopte S, Saddiwal R. Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(11):953-957.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document