Comparison of radiographic bone height assessments in panoramic and intraoral radiographs of implant patients.
Comparison of radiographic bone height assessments in panoramic and intraoral radiographs of implant patients.
复制标题
种植体患者全景和口内 X 线照片中 X 线骨高度评估的比较。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Andersson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Kullman;A. Al;L. Zetterqvist;L. Andersson
目的
比较在种植治疗后的私人实践中常用的两种放射学方法，口腔内和全景放射学方法，以提供关于种植体周缘骨水平的可靠信息的能力。另一个目的是比较观察者间和观察者内的可靠性。
材料和方法
对10家私人诊所的下颌种植患者进行了回顾性研究。在大学口腔放射科诊所对术后口腔内和全景X线片进行了评估。两名观察员，一名口腔颌面放射学专家和一名口腔颌面外科专家，在两次相隔数周的评估中评估了骨水平，所有种植体远中和近中表面似乎连接边缘骨的线被登记在案。Kappa统计用于比较评估、观察者和放射学方法之间的一致性。
结果
观察员内部的一致意见是好的或非常好的，而观察员之间的一致意见主要是温和的。两种方法之间的符合率也是中等的。7%的网站无法评估，支持全景放射照片的网站略有不同。在对全景X线片的评估中，放射科医生发现比外科医生更难评估的部位。
结论
在这项研究中，全景X线片被发现与传统的口腔内X线片一样可靠，当被用来评估骨附着到种植体线的点时。观察员内部和观察员之间的协议是可靠的，但不是很好。放射科医生更成功地找到了无法准确评估骨骼水平的部位。
PURPOSE
To compare the ability of 2 radiographic methods, intraoral and panoramic radiography, commonly used in private practices following implant treatment to provide reliable information about the level of peri-implant marginal bone. An additional aim was to compare the inter- and intraobserver reliability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients with implants placed in the mandible in 10 private practices were studied retrospectively. Postoperative intraoral and panoramic radiographs were evaluated at a university oral radiology clinic. Two observers, a specialist in oral and maxillofacial radiology and a specialist in oral and maxillofacial surgery, assessed the bone level, and the thread at which the marginal bone seemed to be attached was registered for the distal and mesial surfaces of all implants at 2 assessments several weeks apart. Kappa statistics was used to compare the agreement between assessments, observers, and methods of radiography.
RESULTS
Intraobserver agreement was good or very good, while interobserver agreement was predominantly moderate. The agreement rate between the methods was also moderate. Seven percent of the sites were not possible to assess, with a small difference in favor for panoramic radiographs. In the assessment of the panoramic radiographs, the radiologist found more sites too difficult to assess than the surgeon did.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, panoramic radiographs were found to be as reliable as conventional intraoral radiographs when used to assess the point of bone attachment to implant threads. Intra- and interobserver agreement were reliable but not excellent. The radiologist was more successful in finding sites where the bone level was impossible to assess accurately.