We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Accuracy of radiographic measurements for implant planning using cone-beam and helical computer tomography.
Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry 2017 August
AIM: The aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of radiographic measurements for dental implants planning using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and helical computed tomography (HCT).
METHODS: Six pig ribs were wrapped by putty impression material, with radiographic markers placed. Two CBCT and an HCT were taken following the standard protocols. Twenty-five locations were selected, with vertical and horizontal dimensions measured using the default software, as well as on the processed HCT films by a digital caliper. The actual dimensions of the ribs measured by the digital caliper served as the control. Differences between radiographic dimensions and the actual dimensions were tested by two-way analysis of variance.
RESULTS: No differences were found between measurements made by CBCT and HCT images using the default software (P > 0.05). However, both measurements were statistically-significantly lower than the control (P < 0.001), and the mean difference was 0.3 mm. Measurements made on HCT films were statistically-significantly greater than the control (P < 0.001), and the mean difference was 0.5 mm.
CONCLUSION: The accuracy of CBCT and HCT are similar, and both are reliable tools for implant planning. It is preferable to perform the planning using default software, rather than making direct measurements on films.
METHODS: Six pig ribs were wrapped by putty impression material, with radiographic markers placed. Two CBCT and an HCT were taken following the standard protocols. Twenty-five locations were selected, with vertical and horizontal dimensions measured using the default software, as well as on the processed HCT films by a digital caliper. The actual dimensions of the ribs measured by the digital caliper served as the control. Differences between radiographic dimensions and the actual dimensions were tested by two-way analysis of variance.
RESULTS: No differences were found between measurements made by CBCT and HCT images using the default software (P > 0.05). However, both measurements were statistically-significantly lower than the control (P < 0.001), and the mean difference was 0.3 mm. Measurements made on HCT films were statistically-significantly greater than the control (P < 0.001), and the mean difference was 0.5 mm.
CONCLUSION: The accuracy of CBCT and HCT are similar, and both are reliable tools for implant planning. It is preferable to perform the planning using default software, rather than making direct measurements on films.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app