Carneiro Ana Luiza E, Reis Isabella N R, Bitencourt Fernando Valentim, Salgado Daniela M R A, Costa Claudio, Spin-Neto Rubens
Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, 05508-000, Brazil.
Section for Oral Ecology and Inflammation, Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, 8000, Denmark.
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2024 Apr 29;53(4):207-221. doi: 10.1093/dmfr/twae007.
The aim of this systematic review was to verify the accuracy of linear measurements performed on low-dose CBCT protocols for implant planning, in comparison with those performed on standard and high-resolution CBCT protocols.
The literature search included four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus). Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts according to eligibility criteria, extracted the data, and examined the methodological quality. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used for pooling measurement error data.
The initial search yielded 4684 titles. In total, 13 studies were included in the systematic review, representing a total of 81 samples, while 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias ranged from medium to low. The main results across the studies indicate a strong consistency in linear measurements performed on low-dose images in relation to the reference methods. The overall pooled planning measurement error from low-dose CBCT protocols was -0.24 mm (95% CI, -0.52 to 0.04) with a high level of heterogeneity, showing a tendency for underestimation of real values. Various studies found no significant differences in measurements across different protocols (eg, voxel sizes, mA settings, or dose levels), regions (incisor, premolar, molar) and types (height vs. width). Some studies, however, noted exceptions in measurements performed on the posterior mandible.
Low-dose CBCT protocols offer adequate precision and accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning. Nevertheless, diagnostic image quality needs must be taken into consideration when choosing a low-dose CBCT protocol.
本系统评价的目的是验证与标准和高分辨率CBCT方案相比,低剂量CBCT方案用于种植体规划时进行的线性测量的准确性。
文献检索包括四个数据库(PubMed、Web of Science、Embase和Scopus)。两名研究者根据纳入标准独立筛选标题/摘要和全文,提取数据,并评估方法学质量。使用体外研究质量评估工具进行偏倚风险评估。采用随机效应荟萃分析合并测量误差数据。
初步检索得到4684个标题。系统评价共纳入13项研究,共81个样本,荟萃分析纳入9项研究。偏倚风险从中等到低。各项研究的主要结果表明,低剂量图像上进行的线性测量与参考方法具有很强的一致性。低剂量CBCT方案的总体合并规划测量误差为-0.24 mm(95%CI,-0.52至0.04),异质性较高,显示出对真实值的低估趋势。不同研究发现,不同方案(如体素大小、毫安设置或剂量水平)、区域(切牙、前磨牙、磨牙)和类型(高度与宽度)的测量无显著差异。然而,一些研究指出,在下颌后部进行的测量存在例外情况。
低剂量CBCT方案为种植体规划提供了足够的线性测量精度和准确性。然而,选择低剂量CBCT方案时必须考虑诊断图像质量需求。