바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

  • P-ISSN2234-7550
  • E-ISSN2234-5930
  • SCOPUS, KCI, ESCI

Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and digital panoramic radiography for detecting peri-implant alveolar bone changes using trabecular micro-structure analysis

Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons / Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, (P)2234-7550; (E)2234-5930
2022, v.48 no.1, pp.41-49
https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2022.48.1.41
Guldane Magat (Necmettin Erbakan University)
Elif Oncu (Necmettin Erbakan University)
Sevgi Ozcan (Necmettin Erbakan University)
Kaan Orhan (Ankara University)

Abstract

Objectives: We compared changes in fractal dimension (FD) and grayscale value (GSV) of peri-implant alveolar bone on digital panoramic radiogra-phy (DPR) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) immediately after implant surgery and 12 months postoperative. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 16 patients who received posterior mandibular area dental implants with CBCT scans taken about 2 weeks after implantation and one year after implantation were analyzed. A region of interest was selected for each patient. FDs and GSVs were evaluated immediately after implant surgery and at 12-month follow-up to examine the functional loading of the implants. Results: There were no significant differences between DPR and CBCT measurements of FD values (P>0.05). No significant differences were ob-served between FD values and GSVs calculated after implant surgery and at the 12-month follow-up (P>0.05). GSVs were not correlated with FD values (P>0.05). Conclusion: The DPR and reconstructed panoramic CBCT images exhibit similar image quality for the assessment of FD. There were no changes in FD values or GSVs of the peri-implant trabecular bone structure at the 12-month postoperative evaluation of the functional loading of the implant in comparison to values immediately after implantation. GSVs representing bone mass do not align with FD values that predict bone microstructural parameters. Therefore, GSVs and FDs should be considered different parameters for assessing bone quality.

keywords
Fractals, Bone density, Panoramic radiography, Cone-beam computed tomography, Dental implants

Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons