Browse > Article

The Effect of the Axial Plane on Measurement of Available Bone Height for Dental Implant in Computed Tomography of the Mandible  

Jhin, Min-Ju (Department of Periodontology, Graduate School, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science / v.32, no.2, 2002 , pp. 379-388 More about this Journal
Abstract
For the success of dental implant, accurate radiographic evaluation is prerequisite for planning the location of the osseointegrated implants and avoiding injury to vital structures. CT/MPR(computed tomography/multiplanar reformation) shows improved visualization of inferior alveolar canal. In order to obtain cross-sectional images parallel to the teeth, the occlusal plane is used to orientate for the axial plane. If the direction of axial plane is not parallel to the occlusal plane, the reformatted cross-sectional scans will be oblique to the planned fixture direction and will not show the actual dimension of the planned fixture's location. If the available bone height which measured in the cross-sectional view is much greater than the actual available bone height, penetration of canal may occur. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of the axial plane to measurement of available bone height for dental implant in computed tomography of the mandible. 40 patients who had made radiographic stents and had taken CT were selected. The sites that were included in the study were 45 molar regions. In the central panoramic scan, the length from alveolar crest to superior border of inferior alveolar canal(available bone height, ABH) was measured in direction of reformatted cross-sectional plane(uncorrected ABH). Then, length from alveolar crest to superior border of canal was measured in direction of stent(corrected ABH). The angle between uncorrected ABH and corrected ABH was measured. From each ABH, available fixture length was decided by $Br{{\aa}}nemark$ system. The results were following ; the difference between two ABHs was statistically significant in both first and second molar(p< 0.01). The percentage of difference more than 1 mm was 8.7% in first molar and 15.5% in second molar. The percentage of difference more than 2 mm was 2.0% in first molar and 6.6% in second molar. The maximum value of difference was 2.5 mm in first molar and 2.2 mm in second molar. The correlations between difference of 2 ABHs and angle was positive correlations in both first and second molar. The correlation coefficient was 0.534 in first molar and 0.728 in second molar. The second molar has a stronger positive correlation. The percentage of disagreement between 2 fixture lengths from two ABHs was 24.4% in first molar and 28.9% in second molar.
Keywords
axial plane; available bone height; CT; inferior alveolar canal; dental implant;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Williams MYA, Mealey BL, Hallon WW. The role of computerized tom-ography in dental implantology. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992; 7:373-380
2 Wise MD. Failure in the restored dentition : management and treatment. Quintessence 1995 p.514-517
3 Alder ME, Deahl ST, MAtteson SR. Clinical usefulness of two-dimensional reformatted and three-dimenstionally rendered computerized tomographic images: literature review and a survey of surgeons' opinions. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:375-386   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Choi SC, Choi HM, Park RJ, Lee SS, Park TW, You DS. Accuracy of CT image in measuring the mandible for implant : Effect of mandibular position and gantry angle. J Korean Acad Oral Maxillofac Radiol 1998;28:226-234
5 Todd AD, Gher Me, Quintero G, Richardson AC. Interpretation of linear and computed tomograms in the assessment of implant recipient sites. J Periodontol 1993;64:1243-1249   DOI
6 Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd Ed. Mosby, 1999 p.360-363
7 Klinge, Petersson A, Maly P. Location of the mandibular canal : Comparison of macroscopic findings, conventional radiography, and com- puted tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:327-332   PUBMED
8 Sonick M, Abrahams J, Faiella RA. A comparison of th accuracy of periapical, panoramic and computerized tomographic radiographs in locating th mandibular canal. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:455-460
9 Ekestubbe A, Grondahl H-G. Relia- bility of spiral tomography with the Scanora technique for dental implant planning. Clin Oral Impl Res 1993; 4:327-332
10 Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B. Visualization of the mandibular canal by different radographic techniques. Clin Oral Impl Rs 1992;3:90-97   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Kohavi D, Bar-Ziv J, Marmary Y Effect of axial plane deviation on cross-sectional height in reformatted computed tomography of the mandible. Dentomaxillofac radiol 1997; 26: 189-191   DOI   ScienceOn
12 World Workshop in Periodontics. Con- sensus report implant theraph II. Annals Peirodontol 1996;1:816-820   DOI   ScienceOn