Juliana Batista Melo da Fonte, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Débora Costa Ruiz, Maria Fernanda Silva Andrade-Bortoletto, Saulo L. Sousa Melo, Deborah Queiroz Freitas
{"title":"氧化锆种植体的数量和 CBCT 图像重建的厚度会影响种植体周围骨缺损的检测吗?活体诊断准确性研究","authors":"Juliana Batista Melo da Fonte, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Débora Costa Ruiz, Maria Fernanda Silva Andrade-Bortoletto, Saulo L. Sousa Melo, Deborah Queiroz Freitas","doi":"10.1111/clr.14336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the influence of multiplanar reconstruction thickness on the detection of peri-implant bone defects with a standalone zirconia implant and compare it to when another implant is in the vicinity using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Five dry human mandibles were used to create twenty implant sites in the second premolar and first molar regions. The OP300 Maxio was used to acquire CBCT images (90 kVp, 6.3 mA, 5 × 5 cm FOV, and 0.125 mm<sup>3</sup> voxel size) before and after creating 3 mm peri-implant bone defects in the buccal aspect of the premolar region. Half of the scans featured a single zirconia implant in the premolar region, while the others had two implants in the premolar and molar regions. Three reconstruction thicknesses (0.125 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm) were considered for the multiplanar reconstruction analyses. Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the detection of peri-implant bone defects using a 5-point scale. Diagnostic parameters were calculated and compared using Two-way ANOVA (<i>α</i> = .05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The studied factors showed no significant influence on the diagnosis of peri-implant bone defects (<i>p</i> > .05). Diagnostic performance was notably higher with a single implant, especially with a 2-mm reconstruction thickness (AUC = 0.88, sensitivity = 0.68, specificity = 0.94). Although the differences were not statistically significant, the results were more modest when two implants were present (AUC = 0.80, sensitivity = 0.58, specificity = 0.82).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The presence of an adjacent zirconia implant and variations in reconstruction thickness did not influence the detection of 3 mm buccal peri-implant bone defects on CBCT images.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"35 11","pages":"1485-1492"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do the number of zirconia implants and the thickness of CBCT image reconstruction affect the detection of peri-implant bone defect? A diagnostic accuracy ex vivo study\",\"authors\":\"Juliana Batista Melo da Fonte, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Amanda Farias-Gomes, Débora Costa Ruiz, Maria Fernanda Silva Andrade-Bortoletto, Saulo L. Sousa Melo, Deborah Queiroz Freitas\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/clr.14336\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate the influence of multiplanar reconstruction thickness on the detection of peri-implant bone defects with a standalone zirconia implant and compare it to when another implant is in the vicinity using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Five dry human mandibles were used to create twenty implant sites in the second premolar and first molar regions. The OP300 Maxio was used to acquire CBCT images (90 kVp, 6.3 mA, 5 × 5 cm FOV, and 0.125 mm<sup>3</sup> voxel size) before and after creating 3 mm peri-implant bone defects in the buccal aspect of the premolar region. Half of the scans featured a single zirconia implant in the premolar region, while the others had two implants in the premolar and molar regions. Three reconstruction thicknesses (0.125 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm) were considered for the multiplanar reconstruction analyses. Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the detection of peri-implant bone defects using a 5-point scale. Diagnostic parameters were calculated and compared using Two-way ANOVA (<i>α</i> = .05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The studied factors showed no significant influence on the diagnosis of peri-implant bone defects (<i>p</i> > .05). Diagnostic performance was notably higher with a single implant, especially with a 2-mm reconstruction thickness (AUC = 0.88, sensitivity = 0.68, specificity = 0.94). Although the differences were not statistically significant, the results were more modest when two implants were present (AUC = 0.80, sensitivity = 0.58, specificity = 0.82).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The presence of an adjacent zirconia implant and variations in reconstruction thickness did not influence the detection of 3 mm buccal peri-implant bone defects on CBCT images.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"volume\":\"35 11\",\"pages\":\"1485-1492\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14336\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14336","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do the number of zirconia implants and the thickness of CBCT image reconstruction affect the detection of peri-implant bone defect? A diagnostic accuracy ex vivo study
Objectives
To evaluate the influence of multiplanar reconstruction thickness on the detection of peri-implant bone defects with a standalone zirconia implant and compare it to when another implant is in the vicinity using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods
Five dry human mandibles were used to create twenty implant sites in the second premolar and first molar regions. The OP300 Maxio was used to acquire CBCT images (90 kVp, 6.3 mA, 5 × 5 cm FOV, and 0.125 mm3 voxel size) before and after creating 3 mm peri-implant bone defects in the buccal aspect of the premolar region. Half of the scans featured a single zirconia implant in the premolar region, while the others had two implants in the premolar and molar regions. Three reconstruction thicknesses (0.125 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm) were considered for the multiplanar reconstruction analyses. Five oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the detection of peri-implant bone defects using a 5-point scale. Diagnostic parameters were calculated and compared using Two-way ANOVA (α = .05).
Results
The studied factors showed no significant influence on the diagnosis of peri-implant bone defects (p > .05). Diagnostic performance was notably higher with a single implant, especially with a 2-mm reconstruction thickness (AUC = 0.88, sensitivity = 0.68, specificity = 0.94). Although the differences were not statistically significant, the results were more modest when two implants were present (AUC = 0.80, sensitivity = 0.58, specificity = 0.82).
Conclusions
The presence of an adjacent zirconia implant and variations in reconstruction thickness did not influence the detection of 3 mm buccal peri-implant bone defects on CBCT images.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.