Buccal bone thickness assessment for immediate anterior dental implant planning: A pilot study comparing cone-beam computed tomography and 3D double-echo steady-state MRI.
buccal bone thickness
cone-beam computed tomography
dental implant
immediate implant
magnetic resonance imaging
Journal
Clinical implant dentistry and related research
ISSN: 1708-8208
Titre abrégé: Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100888977
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2023
Feb 2023
Historique:
revised:
16
10
2022
received:
02
07
2022
accepted:
17
10
2022
pubmed:
2
12
2022
medline:
9
2
2023
entrez:
1
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate image quality and diagnostic accuracy of buccal bone thickness assessment in maxillary and mandibular anterior region using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and 3-dimensional double-echo steady-state (DESS) MRI for preoperative planning of immediate dental implants in healthy individuals. One hundred and twenty teeth in 10 volunteers were retrospectively evaluated for image quality and artifacts using Likert scale (4 = excellent to 0 = decreased). Buccal bone thickness was measured at three measurement points (M1 = 2 mm from the cementoenamel junction, M2 = middle of the root, and M3 = at the root apex) for each tooth in the maxillary (13-23) and the mandibular anterior region (33-43). Descriptive statistics and two-way ANOVA with Tukey's Post-hoc test were performed to evaluate the significant differences (α = 0.05) between both imaging modalities. Image quality showed little to no artifacts and enabled confident diagnostic interpretation (CBCT (3.72 ± 0.46); MRI (3.65 ± 0.49)), with no significant differences between both imaging modalities (p > 0.05). Regarding the assessment of buccal bone thickness at M1-M3 for the teeth 13-23 and 33-43, no significant differences were noted (p > 0.05). MRI demonstrated slight, nonsignificant overestimation of thickness with the canines having mainly a thick buccal bone wall, where thin buccal wall was evident for the central incisors. Black bone MRI sequences, such as 3D-DESS MRI, for immediate implant planning provided confidential diagnostic accuracy in bone thickness assessment without significant disadvantages compared to CBCT. Thus, the implementation of no-dose protocols for dental rehabilitation using an immediate loading approach seems promising and could further improve the treatment strategy for dental rehabilitation.
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
35-45Informations de copyright
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Tallarico M. Computerization and digital workflow in medicine: focus on digital dentistry. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(9):2172.
Wilson TG, Buser D. Timing of anterior implant placement postextraction: immediate versus early placement. Clin Adv Periodontics. 2011;1(1):61-76.
Koh RU, Rudek I, Wang HL. Immediate implant placement: positives and negatives. Implant Dent. 2010;19(2):98-108.
Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Dental implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets versus healed sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015;43(1):16-41.
Mello CC, Lemos CAA, Verri FR, Dos Santos DM, Goiato MC, Pellizzer EP. Immediate implant placement into fresh extraction sockets versus delayed implants into healed sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;46(9):1162-1177.
Ribeiro FS, Pontes AE, Marcantonio E, Piattelli A, Neto RJ. Success rate of immediate nonfunctional loaded single-tooth implants: immediate versus delayed implantation. Implant Dent. 2008;17(1):109-117.
Chen ST, Buser D. Clinical and esthetic outcomes of implants placed in postextraction sites. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(suppl):186-217.
Evans CD, Chen ST. Esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placements. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(1):73-80.
De Bruyckere T, Cabeza RG, Eghbali A, Younes F, Cleymaet R, Cosyn J. A randomized controlled study comparing guided bone regeneration with connective tissue graft to reestablish buccal convexity at implant sites: a 1-year volumetric analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2020;22(4):468-476.
Wismeijer D, Chen ST. Proceedings of the 6th ITI consensus conference. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(suppl 16):5-7.
Le BT, Borzabadi-Farahani A. Labial bone thickness in area of anterior maxillary implants associated with crestal labial soft tissue thickness. Implant Dent. 2012;21(5):406-410.
Chen ST, Darby IB, Reynolds EC. A prospective clinical study of non-submerged immediate implants: clinical outcomes and esthetic results. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(5):552-562.
Waller T, Herzog M, Thoma DS, Hüsler J, Hämmerle CHF, Jung RE. Long-term clinical and radiographic results after treatment or no treatment of small buccal bone dehiscences at posterior dental implants: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31(6):517-525.
Wehner C, Bertl K, Durstberger G, Arnhart C, Rausch-Fan X, Stavropoulos A. Characteristics and frequency distribution of bone defect configurations in peri-implantitis lesions-a series of 193 cases. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021;23(2):178-188.
Dantas LL, Ferreira PP, Oliveira L, et al. Cone beam computed tomography devices in the evaluation of buccal bone in anterior teeth. Aust Dent J. 2019;64(2):161-166.
Van Dessel J, Nicolielo LF, Huang Y, et al. Accuracy and reliability of different cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices for structural analysis of alveolar bone in comparison with multislice CT and micro-CT. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017;10(1):95-105.
Dings JP, Verhamme L, Merkx MA, Xi T, Meijer GJ, Maal TJ. Reliability and accuracy of cone beam computed tomography versus conventional multidetector computed tomography for image-guided craniofacial implant planning: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019;34(3):665-672.
Salimov F, Tatli U, Kürkçü M, Akoğlan M, Oztunç H, Kurtoğlu C. Evaluation of relationship between preoperative bone density values derived from cone beam computed tomography and implant stability parameters: a clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(9):1016-1021.
Stratis A, Zhang G, Jacobs R, Bogaerts R, Bosmans H. The growing concern of radiation dose in paediatric dental and maxillofacial CBCT: an easy guide for daily practice. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(12):7009-7018.
Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, et al. Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology. 2009;251(1):175-184.
Jaju PP, Jaju SP. Cone-beam computed tomography: time to move from ALARA to ALADA. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45(4):263-265.
Al-Haj Husain A, Solomons M, Stadlinger B, et al. Visualization of the inferior alveolar nerve and lingual nerve using MRI in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a systematic review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(9):1657.
de Carvalho E, Silva Fuglsig JM, Wenzel A, Hansen B, Lund TE, Spin-Neto R. Magnetic resonance imaging for the planning, execution, and follow-up of implant-based oral rehabilitation: systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2021;36(3):432-441.
Valdec S, Al-Haj Husain A, Winklhofer S, Müller M, Piccirelli M, Stadlinger B. Comparison of preoperative cone-beam computed tomography and 3D-double echo steady-state MRI in third molar surgery. J Clin Med. 2021;10(20):4768.
Al-Haj Husain A, Stadlinger B, Winklhofer S, Müller M, Piccirelli M, Valdec S. Mandibular third molar surgery: intraosseous localization of the inferior alveolar nerve using 3D double-echo steady-state MRI (3D-DESS). Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(7):1245.
Naraghi AM, Awdeh H, Wadhwa V, Andreisek G, Chhabra A. Diffusion tensor imaging of peripheral nerves. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2015;19(2):191-200.
Guggenberger R, Winklhofer S, Osterhoff G, et al. Metallic artefact reduction with monoenergetic dual-energy CT: systematic ex vivo evaluation of posterior spinal fusion implants from various vendors and different spine levels. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(11):2357-2364.
Gakonyo J, Mohamedali AJ, Mungure EK. Cone beam computed tomography assessment of the buccal bone thickness in anterior maxillary teeth: relevance to immediate implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33(4):880-887.
Hämmerle CH, Chen ST, Wilson TG. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding the placement of implants in extraction sockets. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(suppl):26-28.
Aizcorbe-Vicente J, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Canullo L, Soto-Peñaloza D, Peñarrocha-Diago M. Influence of facial bone thickness after implant placement into the healed ridges on the remodeled facial bone and considering soft tissue recession: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2020;35(1):107-119.
Heimes D, Schiegnitz E, Kuchen R, Kämmerer PW, Al-Nawas B. Buccal bone thickness in anterior and posterior teeth-a systematic review. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(12):1663.
Braut V, Bornstein MM, Belser U, Buser D. Thickness of the anterior maxillary facial bone wall-a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011;31(2):125-131.
Januário AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1168-1171.
Wang HM, Shen JW, Yu MF, Chen XY, Jiang QH, He FM. Analysis of facial bone wall dimensions and sagittal root position in the maxillary esthetic zone: a retrospective study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(5):1123-1129.
Yeung AWK, Jacobs R, Bornstein MM. Novel low-dose protocols using cone beam computed tomography in dental medicine: a review focusing on indications, limitations, and future possibilities. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23(6):2573-2581.
Al-Haj Husain A, Döbelin Q, Giacomelli-Hiestand B, Wiedemeier DB, Stadlinger B, Valdec S. Diagnostic accuracy of cystic lesions using a pre-programmed low-dose and standard-dose dental cone-beam computed tomography protocol: an ex vivo comparison study. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(21):7402.
Flügge T, Ludwig U, Hövener JB, Kohal R, Wismeijer D, Nelson K. Virtual implant planning and fully guided implant surgery using magnetic resonance imaging-proof of principle. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31(6):575-583.
Hilgenfeld T, Juerchott A, Jende JME, et al. Use of dental MRI for radiation-free guided dental implant planning: a prospective, in vivo study of accuracy and reliability. Eur Radiol. 2020;30(12):6392-6401.
Al-Haj Husain A, Valdec S, Stadlinger B, Rücker M, Piccirelli M, Winklhofer S. Preoperative visualization of the lingual nerve by 3D double-echo steady-state MRI in surgical third molar extraction treatment. Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26(2):2043-2053.
Hilgenfeld T, Prager M, Heil A, et al. PETRA, MSVAT-SPACE and SEMAC sequences for metal artefact reduction in dental MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(12):5104-5112.
Eley KA, McIntyre AG, Watt-Smith SR, Golding SJ. “Black bone” MRI: a partial flip angle technique for radiation reduction in craniofacial imaging. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1011):272-278.
Yan Q, Xiao LQ, Su MY, Mei Y, Shi B. Soft and hard tissue changes following immediate placement or immediate restoration of single-tooth implants in the esthetic zone: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(6):1327-1340.
Seyssens L, De Lat L, Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with or without connective tissue graft: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2021;48(2):284-301.
Seyssens L, Eeckhout C, Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with or without socket grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022;24(3):339-351.