...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical oral implants research >Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images
【24h】

Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images

机译:使用数字全景X射线照片,CBCT生成的全景图像和CBCT横截面图像规划牙种植体的尺寸

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: To compare the implant size (width and length) planned with digital panoramic radiographs, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-generated panoramic views, or CBCT cross-sectional images, in four implant systems. Material and methods: Seventy-one patients with a total of 103 implant sites in the upper premolar and/or lower molar regions were examined with digital panoramic radiography (D-PAN) and (CBCT). A metal ball 5 mm in diameter was placed in the edentulous area for the D-PAN. CBCT data sets were reformatted to a 10-mm thick CBCT panoramic view (CBCT-pan) and 1-mm cross-sections (CBCT-cross). Measurements were performed in the images using dedicated software. All images were displayed on a monitor and assessed by three observers who outlined a dental implant by placing four reference points in the site of the implant-to-be. Differences in width and length of the implant-to-be from the three modalities were analyzed. The implant size selected in the CBCT-cross images was then compared to that selected in the other two modalities (D-PAN and CBCT-pan) for each of the implant systems separately. Results: The implant-to-be (average measurements among observers) was narrower when measured in CBCT-cross compared with both D-PAN and CBCT-Pan. For premolar sites, the width also differed significantly between D-PAN and CBCT-pan modalities. The implant-to-be was also significantly shorter when recorded in CBCT-cross than in D-PAN. In premolar sites, there were no significant differences in implant length among the three image modalities. It mattered very little for the change in implant step sizes whether CBCT-cross was compared to D-PAN or CBCT-pan images. Conclusion: Our results show that the selected implant size differs when planned on panoramic or cross-section CBCT images. In most cases, implant size measured in cross-section images was narrower and shorter than implant size measured in a panoramic image or CBCT-based panoramic view.
机译:目的:为了比较在四个植入系统中使用数字全景射线照相,锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)生成的全景图或CBCT横截面图像计划的植入物尺寸(宽度和长度)。材料和方法:用数字全景射线照相术(D-PAN)和(CBCT)检查了在上前磨牙和/或下磨牙区域总共有103个植入位点的71位患者。将直径为5 mm的金属球放在用于D-PAN的无牙区域中。将CBCT数据集重新格式化为10mm厚的CBCT全景图(CBCT-pan)和1mm的横截面(CBCT-cross)。使用专用软件在图像中进行测量。所有图像均显示在监视器上,并由三名观察员评估,他们通过在待植入物的位置放置四个参考点来勾勒出牙齿植入物的轮廓。分析了三种形式的待植入物的宽度和长度的差异。然后将在CBCT交叉图像中选择的植入物大小与分别为每个植入系统在其他两种模式(D-PAN和CBCT-pan)中选择的大小进行比较。结果:与D-PAN和CBCT-Pan相比,当在CBCT交叉中测量时,拟植入物(观察者的平均测量值)较窄。对于前磨牙部位,D-PAN和CBCT-pan模态之间的宽度也显着不同。当在CBCT交叉中记录时,要植入的植入物也明显短于D-PAN。在前磨牙部位,三种图像方式之间的植入物长度没有显着差异。无论将CBCT-cross与D-PAN还是CBCT-pan图像进行比较,对于植入步长大小的变化影响都很小。结论:我们的结果表明,在全景或横截面CBCT图像上计划时,选定的植入物尺寸会有所不同。在大多数情况下,在横截面图像中测量的植入物尺寸比在全景图像或基于CBCT的全景图中测量的植入物尺寸更窄和更短。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号