Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Nov;35(11):1485-1492. doi: 10.1111/clr.14336. Epub 2024 Jul 27.
To evaluate the influence of multiplanar reconstruction thickness on the detection of peri-implant bone defects with a standalone zirconia implant and compare it to when another implant is in the vicinity using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Five dry human mandibles were used to create twenty implant sites in the second premolar and first molar regions. The OP300 Maxio was used to acquire CBCT images (90 kVp, 6.3 mA, 5 × 5 cm FOV, and 0.125 mm voxel size) before and after creating 3 mm peri-implant bone defects in the buccal aspect of the premolar region. Half of the scans featured a single zirconia implant in the premolar region, while the others had two implants in the premolar and molar regions. Three reconstruction thicknesses (0.125 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm) were considered for the multiplanar reconstruction analyses. Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the detection of peri-implant bone defects using a 5-point scale. Diagnostic parameters were calculated and compared using Two-way ANOVA (α = .05).
The studied factors showed no significant influence on the diagnosis of peri-implant bone defects (p > .05). Diagnostic performance was notably higher with a single implant, especially with a 2-mm reconstruction thickness (AUC = 0.88, sensitivity = 0.68, specificity = 0.94). Although the differences were not statistically significant, the results were more modest when two implants were present (AUC = 0.80, sensitivity = 0.58, specificity = 0.82).
The presence of an adjacent zirconia implant and variations in reconstruction thickness did not influence the detection of 3 mm buccal peri-implant bone defects on CBCT images.
评估使用独立氧化锆种植体进行多平面重建厚度对种植体周围骨缺损检测的影响,并与邻近种植体时的情况进行比较,采用锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)。
使用五具干燥的人下颌骨在第二前磨牙和第一磨牙区域创建二十个种植体部位。使用 OP300 Maxio 在前磨牙区域颊侧创建 3mm 种植体周围骨缺损前后获取 CBCT 图像(90kVp、6.3mA、5×5cm FOV 和 0.125mm 体素大小)。一半的扫描在前磨牙区域具有单个氧化锆种植体,而其他扫描在前磨牙和磨牙区域具有两个种植体。对于多平面重建分析,考虑了三种重建厚度(0.125mm、1mm 和 2mm)。五位口腔颌面放射科医生使用 5 分制评估种植体周围骨缺损的检测。使用双向方差分析(α=.05)计算和比较诊断参数。
研究因素对种植体周围骨缺损的诊断没有显著影响(p>.05)。单种植体的诊断性能明显更高,特别是在 2mm 重建厚度时(AUC=0.88、敏感性=0.68、特异性=0.94)。虽然差异没有统计学意义,但当存在两个种植体时,结果就不那么显著了(AUC=0.80、敏感性=0.58、特异性=0.82)。
邻近氧化锆种植体的存在和重建厚度的变化不会影响 CBCT 图像上 3mm 颊侧种植体周围骨缺损的检测。