Imaging Sci Dent.  2020 Jun;50(2):133-139. 10.5624/isd.2020.50.2.133.

Comparison between different cone-beam computed tomography devices in the detection of mechanically simulated peri-implant bone defects

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
  • 2Department of Stomatology, Field of Public Oral Health and Forensic Dentistry, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirao Preto, Brazil
  • 3Department of Dental Surgery, Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Malta, Mater Dei Hospital, Msida, Malta

Abstract

Purpose
This study compared 2 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) systems in the detection of mechanically simulated peri-implant buccal bone defects in dry human mandibles.
Materials and Methods
Twenty-four implants were placed in 7 dry human mandibles. Peri-implant bone defects were created in the buccal plates of 16 implants using spherical burs. All mandibles were scanned using 2 CBCT systems with their commonly used acquisition protocols: i-CAT Gendex CB-500 (Imaging Sciences, Hatfield, PA, USA; field of view [FOV], 8 cm×8 cm; voxel size, 0.125 mm; 120 kVp; 5 mA; 23 s) and Orthopantomograph OP300 (Intrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland; FOV, 6 cm×8 cm; voxel size, 0.085 mm; 90 kVp; 6.3 mA; 13 s). Two oral and maxillofacial radiologists assessed the CBCT images for the presence of a defect and measured the depth of the bone defects. Diagnostic performance was compared in terms of the area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and intraclass correlation coefficient.
Results
High intraobserver and interobserver agreement was found (p<0.05). The OP300 showed slightly better diagnostic performance and higher detection rates than the CB-500 (AUC, 0.56±0.03), with a mean accuracy of 75.0%, sensitivity of 81.2%, and specificity of 62.5%. Higher contrast was observed with the CB-500, whereas the OP300 formed more artifacts.
Conclusion
Within the limitations of this study, the present results suggest that the choice of CBCT systems with their respective commonly used acquisition protocols does not significantly affect diagnostic performance in detecting and measuring buccal peri-implant bone loss.

Keyword

Peri-Implantitis; Dental Implants; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Full Text Links
  • ISD
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr