Premium
In vitro assessment of artifacts induced by titanium dental implants in cone beam computed tomography
Author(s) -
Benic Goran I.,
SanchoPuchades Manuel,
Jung Ronald E.,
Deyhle Hans,
Hämmerle Christoph H.F.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.12048
Subject(s) - cone beam computed tomography , implant , dental implant , materials science , dentistry , computed tomography , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , impression , orthodontics , biomedical engineering , medicine , surgery , computer science , botany , world wide web , biology , genus
Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the geometric pattern and the intensity of artifacts around titanium implants in cone beam computed tomography ( CBCT ) using an in vitro model. Material and methods Ten test models, each containing one 4.1‐mm‐diameter titanium implant, were cast from a human mandible using silicone impression material and dental stone. Each model contained an implant in one of the following single‐tooth gaps: 37, 36, 34, 33, 31, 41, 43, 44, 46, and 47. For control purposes, three models without implants were produced. Each model was scanned five times using a CBCT scanner. Gray values ( GV ) were recorded at eight circumferential positions around the implants at 0.5 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm from the implant surface ( GV T est ). GV were measured in the corresponding volumes of interest ( VOI ) in the models without implants ( GV C ontrol ). Differences of gray values (Δ GV ) between GV T est and GV C ontrol were calculated as percentages. To detect differences between GV T est and GV C ontrol , the 95% confidence interval ( CI ) was computed for the values of Δ GV . Repeated measures ANOVA was used for the comparison of Δ GV at 0.5 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm from the implant surface. Results Artifacts reflected by altered GV were always present in the proximity of titanium implants, regardless of the implant position. When comparing GV T est and GV C ontrol , increased GV were found at the buccal and lingual aspects of the implant sites, whereas regions with reduced GV were located along the long axis of the mandibular body of the test models. A significant decrease in artifact intensity was found with increasing distance from the buccal implant surface (Δ GV 0.5 mm : 45 ± 10% [ SD ], Δ GV 1 mm : 28 ± 14% [ SD ], Δ GV 2 mm : 14 ± 7% [ SD ]) ( P < 0.001). Conclusion Artifacts around titanium implants in CBCT images were distributed according to a geometrical pattern.