A questionnaire study to investigate custom and practice of imaging methods for the anterior region of the mandible prior to dental implant placement

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the custom and practice of private dental implant practitioners in the north-west of England when planning imaging methods prior to implant placement in the symphyseal region of the edentulous mandible. To gain an understanding of decision-making when prescribing imaging methods. Methods: A web-based questionnaire presented two realistic clinical scenarios. Both were of edentulous patients for whom implant-retained lower complete dentures were planned. A mixed mode survey methodology was employed. Results: 169 dentists were surveyed with an 80% response rate. The results showed no agreement on prescription of imaging methods. Those in the 0-10 years qualified group were significantly associated with the prescription of three-dimensional (3D) imaging. Implant practitioners who place more than 100 implants per year were significantly associated with the non-use of imaging guides and prescription of the same view for both cases. The sample as a whole, however, changed their prescription according to the case difficulty. Those who have a cone beam CT machine available were more likely to use 3D imaging regardless of the difficulty of the case. Conclusions:Existing guidelines are open to interpretation and could be construed to support a range of imaging choices. Training in dental implantology may leave dentists to make their own judgements about selection criteria. The idiosyncratic nature of independent dental practice may be an important factor in the chaotic pattern of prescriptions. There is a need for widely disseminated, evidence-based selection criteria for imaging prior to dental implantology which are clear and specific.

The impact of CBCT imaging when placing dental implants in the anterior edentulous mandible: a before–after study

“…An attempt was made to choose practitioners with demographic characteristics that represented those of the region as a whole. 34 A sample size calculation suggested a sample size of 33 matched pairs of data (a 5 0.05 12b 5 0.8). It was anticipated that 8 participants would generate 64 matched pairs of data.…”

Management of a neurological lesion involving Canalis Sinuosus: A case report

“…So, a careful preliminary assessment is recommended to detect its presence prior to implant placement. When neurological damage happens, implant should be removed immediately and a corticosteroids therapy given 6 . After management of this case as described, the symptoms were compatible with normal healing process.…”

“…The presence of a CS and accessory foramen (Figure 2) is often ignored in surgical practice as these anatomical variations can only be revealed after a careful examination of pre‐op radiological images 1‐4 . Moreover, their presence may directly influence the efficacy of the treatment 5,6 …”

Cone‐beam computed tomography for oral surgical applications: where is the evidence?

“…It is most unlikely that a radiologist would decline a referral for CBCT in this context, but it would be impossible for a radiologist to insist on CBCT being performed if a surgeon had no wish to use it. Evidence exists that the prescription of imaging prior to implant placement shows wide interpractitioner variation, even being described as ‘chaotic’. One basic point, which should be self‐evident, is that CBCT should not be used as a ‘routine’ investigation at the initial visit of a patient enquiring about implant treatment.…”