Dental photon-counting computed tomography for the assessment of Peri-Implant structures.

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Maurice Ruetters, Christian Mertens, Holger Gehrig, Sinan Sen, Ti-Sun Kim, Hans-Peter Schlemmer, Stefan Schoenberg, Matthias Froelich, Marc Kachelrieß, Stefan Sawall
{"title":"Dental photon-counting computed tomography for the assessment of Peri-Implant structures.","authors":"Maurice Ruetters, Christian Mertens, Holger Gehrig, Sinan Sen, Ti-Sun Kim, Hans-Peter Schlemmer, Stefan Schoenberg, Matthias Froelich, Marc Kachelrieß, Stefan Sawall","doi":"10.1186/s40729-025-00640-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the diagnostic performance of photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) in the imaging of peri-implant bone structures and to compare it quantitatively and qualitatively to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty titanium implants were placed in ten porcine mandibles. CBCT and PCCT scans were acquired and compared quantitatively regarding image noise and CT-values. Additionally bone thickness was compared to a gold standard at 60 standardized locations by one calibrated investigator in both modalities. Measurement accuracy was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis. Two experienced raters performed qualitative assessments of anatomic structures around the implant using a 5-point visibility scale. These included the bone-implant interface around the implant surface, the bone at the implant shoulder as well as the oral and vestibular bone lamella. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using ICC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all evaluated implants, CT-values in a soft-tissue region of interest adjacent to the implant increased by 11.7 ± 3.9% for CBCT acquisitions, whereas they decreased by 5.3 ± 1.3% for PCCT acquisitions. Similarly, image noise in the respective ROIs is increased by a factor of 63 ± 13% in case of CBCT acquisitions and only by 23 ± 5% in case of PCCT acquisitions. Bone thickness deviations were smaller for PCCT (mean ± SD: 0.06 ± 0.08 mm) than for CBCT (0.39 ± 0.34 mm). Qualitative assessments consistently favored PCCT (p < 0.05) with excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.75 ) in almost all categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PCCT enables superior visualization of peri-implant bone structures with fewer artifacts and improved diagnostic accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","volume":"11 1","pages":"51"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335417/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00640-8","RegionNum":3,"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

Purpose: To assess the diagnostic performance of photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) in the imaging of peri-implant bone structures and to compare it quantitatively and qualitatively to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Methods: Thirty titanium implants were placed in ten porcine mandibles. CBCT and PCCT scans were acquired and compared quantitatively regarding image noise and CT-values. Additionally bone thickness was compared to a gold standard at 60 standardized locations by one calibrated investigator in both modalities. Measurement accuracy was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis. Two experienced raters performed qualitative assessments of anatomic structures around the implant using a 5-point visibility scale. These included the bone-implant interface around the implant surface, the bone at the implant shoulder as well as the oral and vestibular bone lamella. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using ICC.

Results: Across all evaluated implants, CT-values in a soft-tissue region of interest adjacent to the implant increased by 11.7 ± 3.9% for CBCT acquisitions, whereas they decreased by 5.3 ± 1.3% for PCCT acquisitions. Similarly, image noise in the respective ROIs is increased by a factor of 63 ± 13% in case of CBCT acquisitions and only by 23 ± 5% in case of PCCT acquisitions. Bone thickness deviations were smaller for PCCT (mean ± SD: 0.06 ± 0.08 mm) than for CBCT (0.39 ± 0.34 mm). Qualitative assessments consistently favored PCCT (p < 0.05) with excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.75 ) in almost all categories.

Conclusions: PCCT enables superior visualization of peri-implant bone structures with fewer artifacts and improved diagnostic accuracy.

用于评估种植体周围结构的牙科光子计数计算机断层扫描。
目的:评价光子计数计算机断层扫描(PCCT)在种植体周围骨结构成像中的诊断价值,并将其与锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)进行定性和定量比较。方法:在10只猪下颌骨内放置30个钛种植体。获得CBCT和PCCT扫描,并对图像噪声和ct值进行定量比较。此外,在两种模式下,由一名校准研究者在60个标准化位置比较骨厚度的金标准。采用Bland-Altman分析评估测量精度。两名经验丰富的评分员使用5分可见性量表对种植体周围的解剖结构进行定性评估。这些包括种植体表面周围的骨-种植体界面,种植体肩部的骨以及口腔和前庭骨板。使用ICC评估了评级机构间的协议。结果:在所有评估的种植体中,CBCT采集的种植体附近感兴趣的软组织区域的ct值增加了11.7±3.9%,而PCCT采集的ct值下降了5.3±1.3%。同样,在CBCT采集的情况下,各自roi中的图像噪声增加了63±13%,而在PCCT采集的情况下仅增加了23±5%。PCCT的骨厚度偏差(平均±SD: 0.06±0.08 mm)小于CBCT(0.39±0.34 mm)。在几乎所有类别中,定性评估一致支持PCCT (p 0.75)。结论:PCCT能够更好地显示种植体周围的骨结构,减少假影,提高诊断准确性。
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
International Journal of Implant Dentistry
International Journal of Implant Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
53
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Implant Dentistry is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal is dedicated to promoting the exchange and discussion of all research areas relevant to implant dentistry in the form of systematic literature or invited reviews, prospective and retrospective clinical studies, clinical case reports, basic laboratory and animal research, and articles on material research and engineering.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信