Cargando…

Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy

AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of alveolar ridge measurements obtained with ridge mapping (RM) technique against cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty partially edentulous patients were recruited for implant placement in the Clin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa, Noriega, Jorge, Guerrero, Maria Eugenia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4520113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26229269
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154189
_version_ 1782383619053977600
author Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa
Noriega, Jorge
Guerrero, Maria Eugenia
author_facet Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa
Noriega, Jorge
Guerrero, Maria Eugenia
author_sort Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa
collection PubMed
description AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of alveolar ridge measurements obtained with ridge mapping (RM) technique against cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty partially edentulous patients were recruited for implant placement in the Clinic of San Martin de Porres University. For all the measurements, a vacuum-formed stent was fabricated for each subject. A buccal and lingual point was made in the stent to provide a reference of measurement for each implant site. RM measurements with the stent were obtained before and after surgical flap reflection. Two calibrated observers made the CBCT images measurements. T-test was used for the statistical analysis. Values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Also, specificity and sensibility of CBCT and RM were compared. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)_ was measure between CBCT measurements. RESULTS: A total of 62 implants sites were evaluated. No statistical significant differences were obtained with CBCT and RM measurements (P = 0,207). Detecting proper buccal-lingual ridge, the sensitivity and specificity were 59% and 91% for RM while CBCT obtained 92% of sensitivity and 94% of specificity. Concordance was found “good” (ICC 0.82). CONCLUSION: Both methods provide valid measurements. Even though, we found diagnostic limitations in the RM, it demonstrated to be a useful method for its exactitude, low cost, the immediate result and no need of radiation. CBCT was recommended when the bone ridge width and height were in the less than ideal for conventional dental implant placement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4520113
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45201132015-07-30 Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa Noriega, Jorge Guerrero, Maria Eugenia J Indian Soc Periodontol Original Article AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of alveolar ridge measurements obtained with ridge mapping (RM) technique against cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty partially edentulous patients were recruited for implant placement in the Clinic of San Martin de Porres University. For all the measurements, a vacuum-formed stent was fabricated for each subject. A buccal and lingual point was made in the stent to provide a reference of measurement for each implant site. RM measurements with the stent were obtained before and after surgical flap reflection. Two calibrated observers made the CBCT images measurements. T-test was used for the statistical analysis. Values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Also, specificity and sensibility of CBCT and RM were compared. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)_ was measure between CBCT measurements. RESULTS: A total of 62 implants sites were evaluated. No statistical significant differences were obtained with CBCT and RM measurements (P = 0,207). Detecting proper buccal-lingual ridge, the sensitivity and specificity were 59% and 91% for RM while CBCT obtained 92% of sensitivity and 94% of specificity. Concordance was found “good” (ICC 0.82). CONCLUSION: Both methods provide valid measurements. Even though, we found diagnostic limitations in the RM, it demonstrated to be a useful method for its exactitude, low cost, the immediate result and no need of radiation. CBCT was recommended when the bone ridge width and height were in the less than ideal for conventional dental implant placement. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4520113/ /pubmed/26229269 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154189 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Castro-Ruiz, Carmen Teresa
Noriega, Jorge
Guerrero, Maria Eugenia
Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title_full Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title_fullStr Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title_full_unstemmed Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title_short Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
title_sort validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4520113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26229269
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154189
work_keys_str_mv AT castroruizcarmenteresa validityofridgemappingandconebeamcomputedtomographyindentalimplanttherapy
AT noriegajorge validityofridgemappingandconebeamcomputedtomographyindentalimplanttherapy
AT guerreromariaeugenia validityofridgemappingandconebeamcomputedtomographyindentalimplanttherapy