Accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning based on low-dose cone beam CT protocols: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Ana Luiza E Carneiro, Isabella N R Reis, Fernando Valentim Bitencourt, Daniela M R A Salgado, Claudio Costa, Rubens Spin-Neto
{"title":"Accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning based on low-dose cone beam CT protocols: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ana Luiza E Carneiro, Isabella N R Reis, Fernando Valentim Bitencourt, Daniela M R A Salgado, Claudio Costa, Rubens Spin-Neto","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twae007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":" ","pages":"207-221"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11056743/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twae007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusion: 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.

基于低剂量锥形束 CT 方案的种植规划线性测量的准确性:系统综述和荟萃分析低剂量 CBCT 的准确性:系统综述和荟萃分析。
目的本系统综述的目的是验证低剂量 CBCT 方案与标准和高分辨率 CBCT 方案相比,在种植规划中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)。两名审稿人根据资格标准独立筛选标题/摘要和全文,提取数据并检查方法学质量。采用体外研究质量评估工具对偏倚风险进行评估。随机效应荟萃分析用于汇总测量误差数据:最初的检索共获得 4,684 个标题。共有 13 项研究被纳入系统综述,代表了 81 个样本,9 项研究被纳入荟萃分析。偏倚风险从中度到低度不等。各项研究的主要结果表明,与参考方法相比,在低剂量图像上进行的线性测量具有很强的一致性。低剂量 CBCT 方案的总体规划测量误差为-0.24 毫米(95% CI,-0.52 至 0.04),异质性较高,显示出低估实际值的趋势。多项研究发现,不同方案(如体素大小、毫安设置或剂量水平)、不同区域(门牙、前臼齿、臼齿)和不同类型(高度与宽度)的测量结果无明显差异。然而,一些研究指出,在下颌后部进行的测量存在例外:结论:低剂量 CBCT 方案为种植规划提供了足够的线性测量精度和准确性。然而,在选择低剂量 CBCT 方案时,必须考虑诊断图像质量的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging. Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology. The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919 - Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks - Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks - Open access option - ISSN: 0250-832X - eISSN: 1476-542X
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信