Assessment of Peri Implant Osteal Changes by Radiographic Evaluation Using Standard Orthopantomograph and Periapical View a Retrospective Study

Abstract

‫الخالصة‬ ‫االهداف‬ ‫الؼظو‬ ‫األًسجت‬ ‫فٍ‬ ‫الخغُشاث‬ ‫ػلً‬ ‫الزسوَت‬ ‫واألشؼت‬ ‫الباًىساها‬ ‫أشؼت‬ ‫اسخخذام‬ ‫حقُُن‬ ‫الً‬ ‫البحث‬ ‫َهذف‬ : ‫ةلت‬ ‫الحا‬ ‫األسةٌاى‬ ‫صسػةت‬ ‫وةىز‬ ‫ُةت‬ ‫الضسػةاث‬ ‫بٌجةاا‬ ‫للخىقةغ‬ ‫هؼُاسا‬ ‫واػخباسها‬ ‫أشهش‬ ‫بأسبؼت‬ ‫وبؼذها‬ ‫الضسػت‬ ‫وضغ‬ ‫ػٌذ‬ ‫اللمو‬ ‫طرااقوا‬ ‫المواا‬ ‫ةا‬ ‫هشَ‬ ‫ػاةش‬ ‫حسةؼت‬ ‫ت‬ ‫هاةاس‬ ‫حةن‬ : ‫ال‬ ‫واشةز‬ ‫لخحلُة‬ ‫الةذَوا‬ ‫كهةاص‬ ‫وباسةخخذام‬ ‫لسسةٌاى‬ ‫رسوَةت‬ ‫وأشةؼت‬ ‫باًىساهةا‬ ‫أشةؼت‬ ‫اشةز‬ ‫وحةن‬ ‫صسػةت‬ ‫وػاةشَي‬ ‫أسبؼةت‬ ‫وباسخخذام‬ ‫للؼظةن‬ ‫قُاسةاث‬ ‫أشهش‬ ‫أسبؼت‬ ‫بؼذ‬ ‫أششي‬ ‫وقُاساث‬ ‫الضسػت‬ ‫وضغ‬ ‫بؼذ‬ ‫والىواٍ‬ ‫اإلًسٍ‬ ‫بجاًبُها‬ ‫الضسػت‬ ‫وىز‬ ‫السٌخٍ‬ ‫النتاقج‬ ‫بةُي‬ ‫الوشضةً‬ ‫أػوةاس‬ ‫حشاووج‬ : 22 ‫و‬ 56 ‫بوؼذز‬ ‫الضسػت‬ ‫وضغ‬ ‫ػٌذ‬ ‫اإلًسٍ‬ ‫الجاًب‬ ‫فٍ‬ ‫الؼظن‬ ‫فقذاى‬ ‫هؼذز‬ ‫اى‬ ‫و‬ ‫سٌت‬ 9560 ‫و‬ ‫هلن‬ 955 ‫هؼةذز‬ ‫ةاى‬ ‫و‬ ‫وةا‬ ‫الىواةٍ‬ ‫للجاًب‬ ‫هلن‬ ‫الفق‬ ‫اإلًسٍ‬ ‫للجاًب‬ ‫ذاى‬ 9500 ‫و‬ ‫هلن‬ 1511 ‫سةلبُت‬ ‫بصىسة‬ ‫سُؤثش‬ ‫والزٌ‬ ‫الؼظن‬ ‫فقذاى‬ ‫لٌسبت‬ ‫هؼٌىٌ‬ ‫فشق‬ ‫را‬ ‫إوصائُا‬ ‫َؼذ‬ ‫لزا‬ ‫الىواٍ‬ ‫للجاًب‬ ‫هلن‬ ‫الضسػت‬ ‫وػوش‬ ‫هذي‬ ‫ػلً‬ ‫االستنتاجات‬ ‫وهشاقبةت‬ ‫وهخابؼخهةا‬ ‫الضسػةاث‬ ‫ًجاا‬ ‫حقُُن‬ ‫فٍ‬ ‫ههن‬ ‫هؼُاس‬ ‫الزسوَت‬ ‫واألشؼت‬ ‫الباًىساها‬ ‫أشؼت‬ ‫اسخخذام‬ ‫َؼذ‬ : ‫الثبا‬ ‫هٌاسبت‬ ‫وبكلفت‬ ‫الؼُاداث‬ ‫هؼظن‬ ‫فٍ‬ ‫هخىفش‬ ‫األشؼت‬ ‫هي‬ ‫الٌىع‬ ‫هزا‬ ‫واى‬ ‫ت‬ ‫شا‬ ‫الخحو‬ ‫وقىة‬ ‫حُت‬ ABSTRACTAims: The aims of the study are to evaluate the radiographical views, OPG and periapical views on the changes in peri-implant bony tissue around dental implant at time of placement and another reading after 16 weeks before functional prosthetic loading and regard it as a prognostic parameter. Material and methods: Nineteen cases with 24 implant were enrolled for standardization. Radiographical measurement undertaken by a periapical and OPG radiographs after implant placement, then after16 weeks later, again a second periapical and OPG radiographs were taken for measurements using Dimaxis 3.2.1. Software program to estimate marginal bone height of both sides of implant and its changes during times of evaluation. Results: 19 medically fit patients, male and female with age 22-65 years, twenty four implants with average bone loss 0.59 mm mesialy and 0.60 mm distally at T0 as standered base line in compared to 0.98mm mesialy and 1.11mm distally at T1as average bone loss. There was a significant bone resorption in both sides in relation of implant size and in comparison to time of placement and after 16 weeks according to statistical analysis. Conclusion: OPG and periapical views are a good parameter for evaluation of successful implant and monitoring of the prognosis and stability and durability, as these radiographs more available in most dental centers and clinics with less cost.

A Comprehensive Assessment of Bone Losses in the Postoperative Phase of Single Implant Placed in Mandibular First Molar Regions

“…They concluded that orthopantomograph is an average radiographic tool as it does not allow an operator to quantify different bone levels at different sections. [ 14 ] However, with the latest three-dimensional radiographies like CBCT, these issues have been largely resolved. In our study, the authors studied precise crestal bone losses at different time intervals by CBCT.…”