Hyppää sisältöön
    • Suomeksi
    • In English
  • Suomeksi
  • In English
  • Kirjaudu
Näytä aineisto 
  •   Etusivu
  • 3. UTUCris-artikkelit
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet
  • Näytä aineisto
  •   Etusivu
  • 3. UTUCris-artikkelit
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet
  • Näytä aineisto
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Zirconia implants interfere with the evaluation of peri-implant bone defects in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images even with artifact reduction, a pilot study

Kuusisto Niina; Abushahba Faleh; Syrjänen Stina; Huumonen Sisko; Vallittu Pekka; Närhi Timo

Zirconia implants interfere with the evaluation of peri-implant bone defects in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images even with artifact reduction, a pilot study

Kuusisto Niina
Abushahba Faleh
Syrjänen Stina
Huumonen Sisko
Vallittu Pekka
Närhi Timo
Katso/Avaa
dmfr.20230252.pdf (3.218Mb)
Lataukset: 

doi:10.1259/dmfr.20230252
URI
https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20230252
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on:
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2025082785062
Tiivistelmä

Objectives: Three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging can be considered, especially in patients with complicated peri-implantitis (PI). Artifacts induced by dense materials are the drawback of CBCT imaging and the peri-implant bone condition may not be assessed reliably because the artifacts are present in the same area. This pilot study investigates the performance of the artifact reduction algorithm (ARA) of the Planmeca Viso G7 CBCT device (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) with three different implant materials and imaging parameters.

Methods: Three pairs of dental implants consisting of titanium, zirconia, and fiber reinforced composite (FRC) were set into a pig mandible. A vertical defect simulating peri-implantitis bone loss was made on the buccal side of one of each implant. The defect was identified and measured by two observers and compared to the actual dimensions. In addition, the bone structure and the marginal cortex visibility between the implants were estimated visually.

Results: The bone defect and its dimensions with the zirconia implant could not be identified in any image with or without the metal artifact reduction algorithm. The bone defect of titanium and FRC implants were identified with all three imaging parameters or even without ARA. The interobserver agreement between the two observers was almost perfect for all categories analyzed.

Conclusion: Peri-implantitis defect of the zirconia implant and the peri-implant bone structure of the zirconia implants cannot be recognized reliably with any ARA levels, or any imaging parameters used with the Planmeca Viso G7. The need for ARA when imaging the peri-implant bone condition of the titanium and FRC implants may be unnecessary.

Kokoelmat
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet [29335]

Turun yliopiston kirjasto | Turun yliopisto
julkaisut@utu.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste
 

 

Tämä kokoelma

JulkaisuajatTekijätNimekkeetAsiasanatTiedekuntaLaitosOppiaineYhteisöt ja kokoelmat

Omat tiedot

Kirjaudu sisäänRekisteröidy

Turun yliopiston kirjasto | Turun yliopisto
julkaisut@utu.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste