Cargando…

The Accuracy of Lateral Cephalogram for Measuring Alveolar Bone Thickness and Root Diameter on Mandibular Incisors

Background: The objective of the study was to ascertain whether the alveolar bone and root of the mandibular central incisor measured from cephalograms can represent the same measurements of both mandibular central and lateral incisors from CBCT. Methods: A total of 38 sets of CBCT images and cephal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Limsakul, Thippawan, Chanmanee, Pannapat, Charoemratrote, Chairat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9777406/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36553166
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12123159
Descripción
Sumario:Background: The objective of the study was to ascertain whether the alveolar bone and root of the mandibular central incisor measured from cephalograms can represent the same measurements of both mandibular central and lateral incisors from CBCT. Methods: A total of 38 sets of CBCT images and cephalograms before treatment were selected for this study. Thicknesses included alveolar bone, cortical bone, and cancellous bone at the labial and lingual sides. Root diameter and total root-bone thickness were also evaluated. The measurements were performed at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the cemento-enamel junction. Heights included labial bone height and lingual bone height. All measurements were performed on cephalograms and CBCT images of the mandibular central incisor (L1CT) and mandibular lateral incisor (L2CT). The data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni tests (p < 0.01) to compare the cephalograms, L1CT, and L2CT. Results: The cephalograms presented thicker alveolar bone and cortical bone (labial: 0.16–0.31 mm, lingual: 0.14–0.29 mm; p < 0.001) as well as higher alveolar crest (labial: 0.46–0.48 mm, lingual: 0.38–0.39 mm; p < 0.001) than the CBCT images on both the labial and lingual sides, whereas lingual cancellous thicknesses were not significantly different (p = 0.257). The cephalograms presented greater total root-bone thicknesses than L1CT (0.19–0.30 mm; p < 0.001), whereas the cephalograms traced thinner roots than L1CT (0.18–0.23 mm; p < 0.001) and L2CT (0.39–0.59 mm; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Lateral cephalograms cannot represent both mandibular central and lateral incisor dentoalveolar thicknesses, heights, and root diameters the same as CBCT. However, the differences were less than 0.5 mm.