Cargando…

Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of using routine 2-dimensional (2D) radiographs (panoramic and periapical) when evaluating the position of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (mini-implants) in the maxilla, and to compare the results to 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). ME...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abbassy, Mona A., Sabban, Hanady M., Hassan, Ali H., Zawawi, Khalid H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Saudi Medical Journal 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4673372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26593168
http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.11.12462
_version_ 1782404727657463808
author Abbassy, Mona A.
Sabban, Hanady M.
Hassan, Ali H.
Zawawi, Khalid H.
author_facet Abbassy, Mona A.
Sabban, Hanady M.
Hassan, Ali H.
Zawawi, Khalid H.
author_sort Abbassy, Mona A.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of using routine 2-dimensional (2D) radiographs (panoramic and periapical) when evaluating the position of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (mini-implants) in the maxilla, and to compare the results to 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from February 2014 to January 2015. Panoramic and periapical radiographs were used to examine the position of mini-implants in relation to the adjacent roots. Rating of mini-implants position was performed by 82 dentists from different specialties, using 2 D images according to the following criteria: 1) away from the root; 2) mini-implant tip appears touching the lamina dura; and 3) mini-implant overlays the lamina dura. The results were compared with CBCT findings. RESULTS: There was no difference between dentists from different specialties when rating the position of the mini-implants (Cronbach’s alpha=0.956). The accuracy of the periapical images was 45.1%, while the panoramic images 33.6%. However, both panoramic and periapical radiographs were significantly inaccurate when assessing the mini-implant position when compared with the CBCT findings (p=0.0001). CONCLUSION: Three-dimensional CBCT technology allows better visualization of mini-implant placement. The use of CBCT when assessing the position of mini-implants is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4673372
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Saudi Medical Journal
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46733722015-12-10 Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography Abbassy, Mona A. Sabban, Hanady M. Hassan, Ali H. Zawawi, Khalid H. Saudi Med J Original Article OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of using routine 2-dimensional (2D) radiographs (panoramic and periapical) when evaluating the position of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (mini-implants) in the maxilla, and to compare the results to 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from February 2014 to January 2015. Panoramic and periapical radiographs were used to examine the position of mini-implants in relation to the adjacent roots. Rating of mini-implants position was performed by 82 dentists from different specialties, using 2 D images according to the following criteria: 1) away from the root; 2) mini-implant tip appears touching the lamina dura; and 3) mini-implant overlays the lamina dura. The results were compared with CBCT findings. RESULTS: There was no difference between dentists from different specialties when rating the position of the mini-implants (Cronbach’s alpha=0.956). The accuracy of the periapical images was 45.1%, while the panoramic images 33.6%. However, both panoramic and periapical radiographs were significantly inaccurate when assessing the mini-implant position when compared with the CBCT findings (p=0.0001). CONCLUSION: Three-dimensional CBCT technology allows better visualization of mini-implant placement. The use of CBCT when assessing the position of mini-implants is recommended. Saudi Medical Journal 2015-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4673372/ /pubmed/26593168 http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.11.12462 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal 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
Abbassy, Mona A.
Sabban, Hanady M.
Hassan, Ali H.
Zawawi, Khalid H.
Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title_full Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title_fullStr Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title_short Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
title_sort evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4673372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26593168
http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.11.12462
work_keys_str_mv AT abbassymonaa evaluationofminiimplantsitesintheposteriormaxillausingtraditionalradiographsandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT sabbanhanadym evaluationofminiimplantsitesintheposteriormaxillausingtraditionalradiographsandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT hassanalih evaluationofminiimplantsitesintheposteriormaxillausingtraditionalradiographsandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT zawawikhalidh evaluationofminiimplantsitesintheposteriormaxillausingtraditionalradiographsandconebeamcomputedtomography