Influence of Low-Dose Protocols of CBCT on Dental Implant Planning

Low-dose CBCT protocols in implant dentistry: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the state-of-the-art evidence for applying low-dose CBCT protocols in 3 stages of implant therapy (planning, insertion, and follow-up examination of peri-implantitis) and assess the overall body of evidence presented in the literature.

STUDY DESIGN

The search was conducted in the MEDLINE/Pubmed and Scopus databases. Studies comparing low-dose CBCT protocols to a relevant reference standard in relation to any stage of implant therapy were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed for all included studies.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included. Low-dose protocols were reported to result from reduction of the exposure parameters of kV, mA, resolution (through increased voxel size), exposure time, and scanning trajectory. The current literature suggests that low-dose CBCT protocols perform similarly in the 3 stages of implant therapy compared to higher resolution protocols regarding objective measurements, with adverse impacts mostly on subjective assessment of image quality. The results also suggest that CBCT-based bone measurements are similar to direct measurements, independent of the imaging protocol. Reduction in all parameters except kV seems feasible as the basis of low-dose CBCT protocols for implant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of low-dose CBCT protocols does not impact objective image quality assessment in any stage of implant therapy. Clinical studies are needed to indicate if the reported results can be extrapolated to improve patient care in relation to the responsible use of ionizing radiation.

The current role and future potential of digital diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic imaging is crucial for implant dentistry. This review provides an up-to-date perspective on the application of digital diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed focusing on the question 'when (and why) do we need diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry?' The search results were summarised to identify different applications of digital diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry.

RESULTS

The most used imaging modalities in implant dentistry include intraoral periapical radiographs, panoramic views and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). These are dependent on acquisition standardisation to optimise image quality. Particularly for CBCT, other technical parameters (i.e., tube current, tube voltage, field-of-view, voxel size) are relevant minimising the occurrence of artefacts. There is a growing interest in digital workflows, integrating diagnostic imaging and automation. Artificial intelligence (AI) has been incorporated into these workflows and is expected to play a significant role in the future of implant dentistry. Preliminary evidence supports the use of ionising-radiation-free imaging modalities (e.g., MRI and ultrasound) that can add value in terms of soft tissue visualisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital diagnostic imaging is the sine qua non in implant dentistry. Image acquisition protocols must be tailored to the patient's needs and clinical indication, considering the trade-off between radiation exposure and needed information. growing evidence supporting the benefits of digital workflows, from planning to execution, and the future of implant dentistry will likely involve a synergy between human expertise and AI-driven intelligence. Transiting into ionising-radiation-free imaging modalities is feasible, but these must be further developed before clinical implementation.

Accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning based on low-dose cone beam CT protocols: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to verify the accuracy of linear measurements performed on low-dose CBCT protocols for implant planning, in comparison with those performed on standard and high-resolution CBCT protocols.

METHODS

The literature search included four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus). Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts according to eligibility criteria, extracted the data, and examined the methodological quality. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used for pooling measurement error data.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 4684 titles. In total, 13 studies were included in the systematic review, representing a total of 81 samples, while 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias ranged from medium to low. The main results across the studies indicate a strong consistency in linear measurements performed on low-dose images in relation to the reference methods. The overall pooled planning measurement error from low-dose CBCT protocols was -0.24 mm (95% CI, -0.52 to 0.04) with a high level of heterogeneity, showing a tendency for underestimation of real values. Various studies found no significant differences in measurements across different protocols (eg, voxel sizes, mA settings, or dose levels), regions (incisor, premolar, molar) and types (height vs. width). Some studies, however, noted exceptions in measurements performed on the posterior mandible.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose CBCT protocols offer adequate precision and accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning. Nevertheless, diagnostic image quality needs must be taken into consideration when choosing a low-dose CBCT protocol.

Influence of CBCT-derived panoramic curve variability in the measurements for dental implant planning

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the curve markings performed prior to panoramic and cross-sectional reconstructions can influence the planning of oral implants.

METHODS

Twenty oral radiologists landmarked the reference panoramic curves in 25 CBCT scans of the mandible. Bone height was measured on the resulting cross-sectional slices in the edentulous region of the lower first molar. The following data were recorded: (1) number of landmarks used to build each reference curve; (2) shape of the reference curve (inverted "U", inverted "V" or "horseshoe"); and (3) measurement in the first molar region. The data were assessed for variability based on the number of landmarks, the shape of the reference curve, and the measurements obtained.

RESULTS

The number of landmarks used to guide the panoramic reconstruction varied among radiologists (p < 0.05), but most of them draw curves in inverted "U" shape (68-100%). The reproducibility of the measurements taken in the edentulous mandibular first molar region was excellent (84.7%). The number of landmarks and the shape of the curve did not have a significant influence on the reproducibility of the measurements (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Variations of the operator-dependent steps during the panoramic reconstructions occur but do not play a significant part changing the measurements taken for oral implant planning.

The in-vitro accuracy of fiducial marker-based versus markerless registration of an intraoral scan with a cone-beam computed tomography scan in the presence of restoration artifact

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of restoration artifact ('metal artifact') on registration accuracy of an intraoral scan and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan, comparing fiducial marker-based registration with markerless registration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A maxillary model was fitted with multiple configurations of zirconia crowns to simulate various states of oral rehabilitation. Intraoral scans and CBCT scans (half and full rotation) were acquired. Registration was performed using markerless (point-based registration with surface-based refinement) and fiducial marker-based registration. Each experimental condition was repeated 10 times (n = 320). The absolute deviation was measured at the canines and first molars, and the average and maximum values were analysed using multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

R2 was 0.874 for average error and 0.858 for maximum error. For markerless registration, there were 0.041 mm (p < .001) and 0.045 mm (p < .001) increases in average and maximum error per crown, respectively. For fiducial marker-based registration, the effect of additional crowns was not statistically significant for average (p = .067) or maximum (p = .438) error. For a full arch of crowns, the regression model predicted average and maximum errors of 0.581 and 0.697 mm for the markerless technique, and 0.185 and 0.210 mm for the fiducial marker-based technique. Overall, the fiducial marker-based technique was more accurate for four or more crowns. The half rotation scan increased average error by 0.021 mm (p = .001) and maximum error by 0.029 mm (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Under the present study's experimental conditions, the fiducial marker-based technique should be considered if four or more full-coverage highly radiopaque restorations are present.

Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative diagnosis in third molar surgery: a systematic review

In recent years, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has made great strides through various technical improvements and new sequences, which have made it one of the most promising and leading imaging techniques in the head and neck region. As modern imaging techniques in dentistry aim to reduce radiation exposure, this systematic review evaluated the possibilities, advantages, and disadvantages of advanced imaging diagnostics using dental MRI and its evidence for clinical indications and limitations relevant to mandibular third molar (MTM) surgery. Two reviewers performed multiple database searches (PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, and Cochrane databases) following the PICOS search strategy using medical subject headings (MeSH) terms, keywords, and their combinations. Ten studies were included in this systematic review. By providing high spatial resolution and excellent soft tissue contrast, black bone MRI sequences such as 3D Double Echo Steady State (DESS) and 3D Short Tau Inversion Recovery (STIR) imaging protocols have the potential to become a valuable alternative to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in future dental clinical routines. Overall, radiation-free MRI represents another step toward personalized dentistry and improved decision-making that avoids ineffectiveness and minimizes risks in oral surgery by taking into account additional patient-side factors such as comorbidity, anatomical norm variations, and imaging biomarkers.

Impact of radiographic field-of-view volume on alignment accuracy during virtual implant planning: A noninterventional retrospective pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of reducing the radiographic field-of-view (FOV) on the trueness and precision of the alignment between cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scanning data for implant planning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen participants presenting with one of three clinical scenarios: single tooth loss (ST, n=5), multiple missing teeth (MT, n=5), and presence of radiographic artifacts (AR, n=5) were included. CBCT volumes covering the full arch (FA) were reduced to the quadrant (Q) or the adjacent tooth/teeth (A). Two operators, an expert (exp) in virtual implant planning and an inexperienced clinician, performed multiple superimpositions, with FA-exp serving as a reference. The deviations were calculated at the implant apex and shoulder levels. Thereafter, linear mixed models were adapted to investigate the influence of FOV on discrepancies.

RESULTS

Evaluation of trueness compared to FA-exp resulted in the largest mean (AR-A: 0.10 ± 0.33 mm) and single maximum discrepancy (AR-Q: 1.44 mm) in the presence of artifacts. Furthermore, for the ST group, the largest mean error (-0.06 ± 0.2 mm, shoulder) was calculated with the FA-FOV, while for MT, with the intermediate volume (-0.07 ± 0.24 mm, Q). In terms of precision, the mean SD intervals were ≤0.25 mm (A-exp). Precision was influenced by FOV volume (FA<Q<A) but not by operator expertise.

CONCLUSIONS

For single posterior missing teeth, an extended FOV does not improve registration accuracy. However, in the presence of artifacts or multiple missing posterior teeth, caution is recommended when reducing FOV.