Cargando…

Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study

This preclinical in vitro study compared the accuracy of implant lengths measured in two different image‐viewers, and examined whether implant‐induced artifacts affected the implant length measurements on CBCT images. A resin edentulous mandibular model, with multiple adjacent implants in the poster...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vazquez, Lydia, Srinivasan, Murali, Khouja, Firas, Combescure, Christophe, Carrel, Jean‐Pierre
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29744148
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.18
_version_ 1783304370940542976
author Vazquez, Lydia
Srinivasan, Murali
Khouja, Firas
Combescure, Christophe
Carrel, Jean‐Pierre
author_facet Vazquez, Lydia
Srinivasan, Murali
Khouja, Firas
Combescure, Christophe
Carrel, Jean‐Pierre
author_sort Vazquez, Lydia
collection PubMed
description This preclinical in vitro study compared the accuracy of implant lengths measured in two different image‐viewers, and examined whether implant‐induced artifacts affected the implant length measurements on CBCT images. A resin edentulous mandibular model, with multiple adjacent implants in the posterior segments, was acquired with a CBCT machine. In two different image‐viewers, two observers independently measured the implant length. Vertical measurements on CBCT images were carried out twice at each session, and repeated one week later. The results demonstrated no significant differences between actual and measured implant lengths. The differences in the mean error for vertical measurements using the two different image‐viewers (cross‐sectional images: OsiriX viewer = −0.01 ± 0.03 mm, NewTom viewer = −0.05 ± 0.09 mm, p‐value = 0.056; sagittal images: OsiriX viewer = −0.03 ± 0.04 mm; NewTom viewer = −0.04 ± 0.10 mm, p‐value = 0.24) were not statistically significant. This in vitro investigation suggests that the accuracy of implant length measurements on CBCT images was not influenced by image‐viewers or by the presence of implant‐induced artifacts. The presence of multiple adjacent implants in the posterior segments of the mandible is not likely to impact the measurements made between the implant apex and vital structures on CBCT images.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5839189
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58391892018-05-09 Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study Vazquez, Lydia Srinivasan, Murali Khouja, Firas Combescure, Christophe Carrel, Jean‐Pierre Clin Exp Dent Res Original Articles This preclinical in vitro study compared the accuracy of implant lengths measured in two different image‐viewers, and examined whether implant‐induced artifacts affected the implant length measurements on CBCT images. A resin edentulous mandibular model, with multiple adjacent implants in the posterior segments, was acquired with a CBCT machine. In two different image‐viewers, two observers independently measured the implant length. Vertical measurements on CBCT images were carried out twice at each session, and repeated one week later. The results demonstrated no significant differences between actual and measured implant lengths. The differences in the mean error for vertical measurements using the two different image‐viewers (cross‐sectional images: OsiriX viewer = −0.01 ± 0.03 mm, NewTom viewer = −0.05 ± 0.09 mm, p‐value = 0.056; sagittal images: OsiriX viewer = −0.03 ± 0.04 mm; NewTom viewer = −0.04 ± 0.10 mm, p‐value = 0.24) were not statistically significant. This in vitro investigation suggests that the accuracy of implant length measurements on CBCT images was not influenced by image‐viewers or by the presence of implant‐induced artifacts. The presence of multiple adjacent implants in the posterior segments of the mandible is not likely to impact the measurements made between the implant apex and vital structures on CBCT images. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5839189/ /pubmed/29744148 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.18 Text en ©2016 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Vazquez, Lydia
Srinivasan, Murali
Khouja, Firas
Combescure, Christophe
Carrel, Jean‐Pierre
Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title_full Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title_fullStr Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title_short Influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
title_sort influence of image‐viewers and artifacts on implant length measurements in cone‐beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29744148
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.18
work_keys_str_mv AT vazquezlydia influenceofimageviewersandartifactsonimplantlengthmeasurementsinconebeamcomputedtomographyaninvitrostudy
AT srinivasanmurali influenceofimageviewersandartifactsonimplantlengthmeasurementsinconebeamcomputedtomographyaninvitrostudy
AT khoujafiras influenceofimageviewersandartifactsonimplantlengthmeasurementsinconebeamcomputedtomographyaninvitrostudy
AT combescurechristophe influenceofimageviewersandartifactsonimplantlengthmeasurementsinconebeamcomputedtomographyaninvitrostudy
AT carreljeanpierre influenceofimageviewersandartifactsonimplantlengthmeasurementsinconebeamcomputedtomographyaninvitrostudy