Figure 5. Flow diagram of CBCT imaging and measurements to calculate bone thickness buccally of implants.
Figure 5. Flow diagram of CBCT imaging and measurements to calculate bone thickness buccally of implants.
Figure 4.
Figure 4. Implant measurements. Measurements were performed at each millimeter along the axis of the implant for 5 mm, beginning at the neck of the implant.
Figure 3. Implant position. Due to the alienation of the patients’ DICOM files by MIRIT, the exact position of the implant was defined. As such, the measurements could take place in the exact correct buccal direction.
Figure 3. Implant position. Due to the alienation of the patients’ DICOM files by MIRIT, the exact position of the implant was defined. As such, the measurements could take ...
Figure 2. Conventional intra-oral radiograph of same patient with implant-supported restoration at position 21.
Figure 2. Conventional intra-oral radiograph of same patient with implant-supported restoration at position 21.
Figure 1. Clinical photograph of implant-supported restoration at position 21.
Figure 1. Clinical photograph of implant-supported restoration at position 21.
Slagter, K.W., Raghoebar, G.M., Vissink, A. et al. Inter- and intraobserver reproducibility of buccal bone measurements at dental implants with cone beam computed tomography in the esthetic region. Int J Implant Dent 1, 8 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-015-0007-1
Download citation
Received: 24 December 2014
Accepted: 19 February 2015
Published: 18 April 2015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11...
Kirsten W. Slagter, Gerry M. Raghoebar, Arjan Vissink, Henny JA. Meijer declare that they have no competing interests.
KWS, GMR, AV, and HJAM provided substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafted the paper or revised it critically; gave final approval of the version to be published; and agreed to b...
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700RB, Groningen, The Netherlands
Kirsten W Slagter, Gerry M Raghoebar, Arjan Vissink & Henny J A Meijer
Department of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700RB, Groningen, The Netherlands
He...
Miyamoto Y, Obama T. Dental cone beam computed tomography analyses of postoperative labial bone thickness in maxillary anterior implants: comparing immediate and delayed implant placement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011;31:215–25.
Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Kilic C, Yuksel S, Avsever H, Farman A, et al. Accuracy of CBCT images in the assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant de...
Den Hartog L, Slater JJ, Vissink A, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. Treatment outcome of immediate, early and conventional single-tooth implants in the aesthetic zone: a systematic review to survival, bone level, soft-tissue, aesthetics and patient satisfaction. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:1073–86.
De Rouck T, Collys K, Cosyn J. Single-tooth replacement in the anterior maxilla by means of immediate im...
three-dimensional
cone beam computed tomography
computerized tomography
Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine
field of view
Hounsfield unit
Multimodality Image Registration using Information Theory
When applying 3D image-based software programs according to the set-up used in this study, CBCTs are suitable for reliable and reproducible measurements of buccal bone thickness at implants.
Intraobserver and interobserver agreement was very high with measurements on CBCTs of bone buccally of dental implants. Apparently, the method is clear and measurements can be performed reproducibly. Moreover, measurements are not observer dependent, meaning that results of different observers in different studies can be compared with each other.
In previous studies, buccal bone thickness was als...
The mean buccal bone thickness measured by observers 1 and 2 was 2.42 mm (sd: 0.50) and 2.41 mm (sd: 0.47), respectively. Interobserver intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98). The mean buccal bone thickness of the first measurement and the second measurement of observer 1 was 2.42 mm (sd: 0.50) and 2.53 mm (sd: 0.49), respectively, with an intraobserver intraclass co...
The implant and patient dataset were exactly aligned by the MIRIT method, so that the distance from the central axis of the implant to the outer contour of the buccal bone could be measured. Area of interest was the upper 5 mm section of the implant, beginning at the neck of the implant towards the apical direction. Exact dimensions along the implant axis of each implant configuration used in the...
Ten patients with a dental implant in the esthetic zone (regions 13 to 23) were included (Figures 1 and 2). Research was carried out in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration. Patients were part of a randomized controlled trial on esthetics; the study was approved by the Medical Ethic Board of the University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen (METC 2010.246) as well as that writt...
Single-tooth implant placement in the esthetic zone is a highly reliable treatment option for replacing a failing tooth [1-4]. Yet, research interest has shifted from implant survival towards optimal preservation of soft and hard tissues [5-7]. Especially in the esthetic region, buccal bone and its preservation is one of the key factors in esthetic outcome [8].
Computerized tomography (CT) scans ...
Sufficient buccal bone is important for optimal esthetic results of implant treatment in the anterior region. It can be measured with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), but background scattering and problems with standardization of the measurements are encountered. The aim was to develop a method for reliable, reproducible measurements on CBCTs.
Using a new method, buccal bone thickness was me...