Effect of anatomical region on the formation of metal artefacts produced by dental implants in cone beam computed tomographic images

Machado, Alessiana Helena; Fardim, Karolina Aparecida Castilho; Souza, Camila Furtado de; Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles; Assis, Neuza Maria Souza Picorelli; Devito, Karina Lopes

doi:10.1259/dmfr.20170281

Cited by 31 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sixteen studies were selected for full-text reading, after which 7 studies were excluded because they dealt with topics related to artifact reduction, the evaluation of peri-implant tissue, and comparisons between the implant radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 yielding a final total of 9 selected articles. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone-beam computed tomography artifacts in the presence of dental implants and associated factors: an integrative review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study was conducted to review the literature regarding the types of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) artifacts around dental implants and the factors that influence their formation. Materials and Methods A search strategy was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify published between 2010 and 2020, and 9 studies were selected. The implants included 306 titanium, titanium-zirconium, and zirconia implants, as well as 5 titanium cylinders. Results The artifacts around the implants were the beam-hardening artifact, the streaking artifact, and band-like radiolucent areas. Some factors that influenced the formation of artifacts were the implant material, bone type, evaluated regions, distance, type of CBCT, field of view (FOV) size, milliamperage, peak kilovoltage (kVp), and voxel size. The beam-hardening artifact was the most widely reported, and it was minimized in protocols with a smaller FOV, larger voxels, and higher kVp. Conclusion The risk and benefit of these protocols in individuals with dental implants must be considered, and clinical examinations and complementary radiographs play an essential role in implantology.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone-beam computed tomography artifacts in the presence of dental implants and associated factors: an integrative review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the composition and positioning of objects within the field of view (FOV) may interfere significantly in this process. [6][7][8] Among the several artifact types found in CBCT images, there are those caused by the presence of high atomic number and density structures, such as dental implant constitutive materials. [5][6][7] One of the main factors responsible for image degradation from this type of artifact is the beam-hardening phenomenon.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their production and effect around the artifact-generator object have been studied in previous years. 5,6,9,[13][14][15] However, it seems there are no studies showing how far the artifact production could reach or which type of dental implant has greater advantages when evaluating its magnitude and, thereafter, the impact on CBCT image quality. Although previous studies have evaluated metal artifacts in CBCT images, the majority of them have been qualitative ones and few studies have quantitatively compared CBCT machines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnitude of cone beam CT image artifacts related to zirconium and titanium implants: impact on image quality

Fontenele

Nascimento

Vasconcelos

et al. 2018

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, the use of CBCT imaging can produce artifacts caused by high-density metal materials such as dental implants [ 38 , 39 ], while CBCT has limited capability to decrease artifacts with use of metal artifact reduction algorithms or correct exposure settings [ 40 , 41 ]. Although these artifacts occur more frequently in the mandible than in the maxilla, and are generated most prominently by zirconium implants, followed by titanium zirconium and titanium implants [ 42 , 43 ], beam hardening and scattering effect artifacts could have reduced the contrast, thereby impairing the detection of structures of interest and as a result producing errors in the linear measurements on CBCT images.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implant-to-root dimensions projected by panoramic radiographs inthe maxillary canine-premolar region: implications for dental implant treatment

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backgound This study aimed to compare panoramic radiography (PAN) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) determinations of implant-to-root dimensions (IRD) in anterior and posterior maxillary regions, and to help determine in which instances increased radiation exposure from CBCT scans may be justified. Methods IRD measured by PAN (PAN-D) from implant-to-root sites (central incisor, lateral incisor, canine, first premolar, and second premolar) was collected from 418 implant sites in 110 adults. The CBCT technique was used as the reference method for the estimation of IRD. The PAN analysis equations were developed using stepwise multiple regression analysis and the Bland–Altman approach was applied to assess the agreement between PAN and CBCT methods. Results The odds ratio that an implant at the canine-to-first premolar (9.7:1) (P = 0.000) or at the first premolar-to-second premolar region (4.5:1) (P = 0.000) belongs to the underestimation group was strong and highly significant. The root mean square error (RMSE) and pure error (PE) were highest for the canine-to-first premolar (RMSE = 0.886 mm, PE = 0.45 mm) and the first premolar-to-second premolar region (4.5:1) (RMSE = 0.944 mm, PE = 0.38 mm). Conclusions This study provides evidence of site-specific underestimations of available horizontal bone dimensions for implants when assessed by PAN. These data suggest that the canines and first and second premolars may have to be excluded when assessing root angulations via PAN.

show abstract

Effect of anatomical region on the formation of metal artefacts produced by dental implants in cone beam computed tomographic images

Abstract: Dental implants always produce metal artefacts in CBCT images, and these artefacts are affected by the anatomical location in the dental arch.

Cited by 31 publications

References 18 publications

Cone-beam computed tomography artifacts in the presence of dental implants and associated factors: an integrative review

Cone-beam computed tomography artifacts in the presence of dental implants and associated factors: an integrative review

Magnitude of cone beam CT image artifacts related to zirconium and titanium implants: impact on image quality

Implant-to-root dimensions projected by panoramic radiographs inthe maxillary canine-premolar region: implications for dental implant treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About