Cone beam computed tomography artefacts around dental implants with different materials influencing the detection of peri-implant bone defects
Cone beam computed tomography artefacts around dental implants with different materials influencing the detection of peri-implant bone defects
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/clr.13596
复制
发表时间：
2020-07-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Bornstein, Michael M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Schriber, Martina;Yeung, Andy Wai Kan;Bornstein, Michael M.
目的探讨锥形束CT（CBCT）对钛（Ti）、二氧化锆（ZrO 2）及钛锆（Ti-Zr）合金种植体周围骨缺损的诊断准确性。材料与方法在6只新鲜猪下颌骨角部植入直径为3.3mm、4.1mm、长度为10 mm的Ti、Ti-Zr或ZrO 2种植体。在插入的12个种植体中，6个在测试组中具有标准化的颊侧种植体周围骨缺损，而6个作为对照，没有骨缺损。CBCT采用三种采集方案（标准、高剂量和低剂量），使用两种器械进行。4名观察员分析了CBCT，如下所示：（a）是否存在种植体周围缺损;（B）是否存在种植体周围伪影以及对缺损诊断的影响;以及（c）颊侧种植体周围缺损的线性测量值，包括高度和宽度（mm）。结果CBCT设备、CBCT设置、种植体材料、种植体直径和观察者背景对诊断准确性无显著影响。缺陷检测的敏感性和特异性值都很高。ZrO（2）导致低于平均诊断准确率（0.781）。种植体周围缺损的线性测量被低估，
Objectives To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for the diagnosis of peri-implant bone defects of titanium (Ti), zirconium dioxide (ZrO2) or titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr) alloy implants. Materials and Methods Ti, Ti-Zr or ZrO(2)implants with two diameters (3.3 mm, 4.1 mm) and one length (10 mm) were inserted in the angle of the mandible of six fresh defrosted pig jaws. Out of the 12 implants inserted, 6 served in the test group with standardized buccal peri-implant bone defects, whereas 6 served as control without bone defects. CBCTs were performed with three acquisition protocols (standard, high and low dose) using two devices. Four observers analysed CBCTs as follows: (a) presence of a peri-implant defect; (b) presence of peri-implant artefacts and impact on defect diagnosis; and (c) linear measurements of buccal peri-implant defect including height and width (in mm). Results CBCT device, CBCT settings, implant material, implant diameter and observer background did not significantly influence diagnostic accuracy. The sensitivity and specificity values were high for defect detection. ZrO(2)led to a lower than average diagnostic accuracy (0.781). The linear measurements of peri-implant defect were underestimated by