S. Latifi, E. Moudi, F. Abesi, A. Minouei, M. Hozouri, A. Bijani
{"title":"超声波和锥形束计算机断层扫描在绵羊模型中测量下颌和上颌牙龈软组织厚度的准确性比较","authors":"S. Latifi, E. Moudi, F. Abesi, A. Minouei, M. Hozouri, A. Bijani","doi":"10.2478/amb-2023-0042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background To date, few studies have compared the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and ultrasonography in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva. Aims To compare the accuracy of ultrasonography and CBCT in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva in a sheep model. Materials and Methods In this study, 38 different landmarks (26 points from the upper jaw and 12 points from the lower jaw) were evaluated. The gingival soft tissue thickness was measured using a digital caliper, ultrasonography, and standard and high-resolution CBCTs. The measurements were finally compared with each other. Results Regarding the thicknesses < 2 mm, no significant difference was seen between the measurements of the digital caliper and ultrasonography (mean difference < 0.1 mm, p = 0.140). Conversely, data analysis indicated significant differences between CBCTs measurements and digital caliper and ultrasonography measurements. Regarding thicknesses > 2 mm, digital caliper measurement was not significantly different from ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT measurements (mean differences < 0.1 mm) but differed from the standard CBCT measurement. Also, a significant difference was observed between ultrasonography and standard CBCT measurements but not between ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT (mean differences < 0.1 mm). Finally, mean differences between standard and high-resolution CBCT measurements were statistically significant. Conclusion According to the results, ultrasonography can be a reliable option for measuring gingival soft tissues regardless of their thickness, while CBCT may be more suitable for thicker gingival tissues. Clinicians should carefully consider the measurement accuracy of different imaging methods when planning dental procedures.","PeriodicalId":35746,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medica Bulgarica","volume":"427 13","pages":"41 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Ultrasonography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Accuracy in Measuring the Soft Tissue Thickness of Maxillary and Mandibular Gingiva in a Sheep Model\",\"authors\":\"S. Latifi, E. Moudi, F. Abesi, A. Minouei, M. Hozouri, A. Bijani\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/amb-2023-0042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background To date, few studies have compared the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and ultrasonography in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva. Aims To compare the accuracy of ultrasonography and CBCT in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva in a sheep model. Materials and Methods In this study, 38 different landmarks (26 points from the upper jaw and 12 points from the lower jaw) were evaluated. The gingival soft tissue thickness was measured using a digital caliper, ultrasonography, and standard and high-resolution CBCTs. The measurements were finally compared with each other. Results Regarding the thicknesses < 2 mm, no significant difference was seen between the measurements of the digital caliper and ultrasonography (mean difference < 0.1 mm, p = 0.140). Conversely, data analysis indicated significant differences between CBCTs measurements and digital caliper and ultrasonography measurements. Regarding thicknesses > 2 mm, digital caliper measurement was not significantly different from ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT measurements (mean differences < 0.1 mm) but differed from the standard CBCT measurement. Also, a significant difference was observed between ultrasonography and standard CBCT measurements but not between ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT (mean differences < 0.1 mm). Finally, mean differences between standard and high-resolution CBCT measurements were statistically significant. Conclusion According to the results, ultrasonography can be a reliable option for measuring gingival soft tissues regardless of their thickness, while CBCT may be more suitable for thicker gingival tissues. Clinicians should carefully consider the measurement accuracy of different imaging methods when planning dental procedures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Medica Bulgarica\",\"volume\":\"427 13\",\"pages\":\"41 - 46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Medica Bulgarica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/amb-2023-0042\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medica Bulgarica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/amb-2023-0042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Ultrasonography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Accuracy in Measuring the Soft Tissue Thickness of Maxillary and Mandibular Gingiva in a Sheep Model
Abstract Background To date, few studies have compared the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and ultrasonography in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva. Aims To compare the accuracy of ultrasonography and CBCT in measuring the soft tissue thickness of the maxillary and mandibular gingiva in a sheep model. Materials and Methods In this study, 38 different landmarks (26 points from the upper jaw and 12 points from the lower jaw) were evaluated. The gingival soft tissue thickness was measured using a digital caliper, ultrasonography, and standard and high-resolution CBCTs. The measurements were finally compared with each other. Results Regarding the thicknesses < 2 mm, no significant difference was seen between the measurements of the digital caliper and ultrasonography (mean difference < 0.1 mm, p = 0.140). Conversely, data analysis indicated significant differences between CBCTs measurements and digital caliper and ultrasonography measurements. Regarding thicknesses > 2 mm, digital caliper measurement was not significantly different from ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT measurements (mean differences < 0.1 mm) but differed from the standard CBCT measurement. Also, a significant difference was observed between ultrasonography and standard CBCT measurements but not between ultrasonography and high-resolution CBCT (mean differences < 0.1 mm). Finally, mean differences between standard and high-resolution CBCT measurements were statistically significant. Conclusion According to the results, ultrasonography can be a reliable option for measuring gingival soft tissues regardless of their thickness, while CBCT may be more suitable for thicker gingival tissues. Clinicians should carefully consider the measurement accuracy of different imaging methods when planning dental procedures.
期刊介绍:
About 30 years ago - in 1973, on the initiative of the Publishing House „Medicine and Physical Culture", namely its former director Mr. Traian Ivanov, the Ministry of Health set up and accepted to subsidize a new medical magazine that was to be published only in the English language and had to reflect the status and the achievements of the Bulgarian medical science. Thus the language barrier was overcome and stable relations were established with the international medical society, large libraries, and university centers. The famous internationally known scientist professor Assen A. Hadjiolov was elected edition-in-chief by the first editorial staff and the magazine was named Acta Medica Bulgarica.