Premium
Implant image quality in dental radiographs recorded using a customized imaging guide or a standard film holder
Author(s) -
Schropp Lars,
Stavropoulos Andreas,
SpinNeto Rubens,
Wenzel Ann
Publication year - 2012
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/j.1600-0501.2011.02180.x
Subject(s) - radiography , medicine , implant , imaging phantom , image quality , dental implant , rendering (computer graphics) , dentistry , orthodontics , nuclear medicine , computer science , surgery , computer vision , image (mathematics)
Objective: To compare a customized imaging guide and a standard film holder for obtaining optimally projected intraoral radiographs of dental implants.Material and methods: Intraoral radiographs of four screw‐type implants with different inclination placed in an upper or lower dental phantom model were recorded by 32 groups of examiners after a short instruction in the use of the RB‐RB/LB‐LB mnemonic rule. Half of the examiners recorded the images using a standard film holder and the other half used a customized imaging guide. Each radiograph was assessed under blinded conditions with regard to rendering of the implant threads and was assigned to one of four quality categories: (1) perfect, (2) not perfect, but clinically acceptable, (3) not acceptable, and (4) hopeless.Results: For the upper jaw, the same number of exposures per implant were made to achieve an acceptable image ( P =0.86) by the standard film holder method (median=2) and the imaging guide method (median=2). For the lower jaw, medians for the imaging guide method and the film holder method were 1 and 2, respectively ( P =0.004). For the imaging guide method , the first exposure was rated as perfect/acceptable in 62% of the cases and for the film holder method in 41% of the cases ( P =0.013). After ≤2 exposures, 78% ( imaging guide method ) and 69% ( film holder method ) of the implant images were perfect/acceptable ( P =0.23). The implant inclination did not have a major influence on the outcomes.Conclusion: Perfect or acceptable images were achieved after two exposures with the same frequency either using a customized imaging guide method or a standard film holder method . However, the use of a customized imaging guide method was overall significantly superior to a standard film holder method in terms of obtaining perfect or acceptable images with only one exposure.To cite this article:
Schropp L, Stavropoulos A, Spin‐Neto R, Wenzel A. Implant image quality in dental radiographs recorded using a customized imaging guide or a standard film holder.
Clin. Oral Impl. Res . 23 , 2012; 55–59.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2011.02180.x