The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Shameeka Thopte, Aastha Chopra, Amit A Mhapuskar, Swati Marathe, Shams U Nisa, Rashmi Saddiwal

Citation Information : Thopte S, Chopra A, Mhapuskar AA, Marathe S, Nisa SU, Saddiwal R. Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (11):953-957.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1961

Published Online: 01-11-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Accurate assessment of osseointegration in dental implants requires precise radiographic visualization of pathologic conditions as well as anatomical structures. The present study aimed to evaluate the formation of bony tissue (osseointegration) using digital orthopantomogram (OPG) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) immediately after implant insertion (within 7 days) and 3 months postinsertion.

Materials and methods

Twenty single-implant sites on mandibular posterior regions were selected on patients irrespective of their gender. Both digital OPG and CBCT were done within a week and again after 3 months of implant insertion surgery, using the same exposure parameters.

Results

Three of the 20 implants were submerged and were excluded as the crestal bone height could not be measured. The participants were recalled for radiographic measurements after 3 months of implant placement. On an average, there was 0.03 mm of osseointegration at the apical portion after 3 months of implant insertion on digital OPG; 0.04 mm of osseointegration at the crestal bone height after 3 months on digital OPG; and 0.01 mm of osseointegration at the apical portion after 3 months on CBCT. No change or ≤0.02 mm of osseointegration at crestal bone height after 3 months on CBCT.

Conclusion

Both digital OPG and CBCT are significant for the assessment of osseointegration in implants, and hence, endow definite benefit for accurate assessment in terms of the success of the implant placement.

Clinical significance

However, CBCT is a better mode of evaluating dental implants but one should keep in mind that radiographic examination must be conducted to the benefit of the patient by application of the lowest achievable dose.

How to cite this article

Chopra A, Mhapuskar AA, Marathe S, Nisa SU, Thopte S, Saddiwal R. Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(11):953-957.


PDF Share
  1. Astra Tech and Brånemark system implants: a 5-year prospective study of marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004 Aug;15(4):413-420.
  2. Effect of microthread on the maintenance of marginal bone level: a 3-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007 Aug;18(4):465-470.
  3. Biological reactions to different dental implant surface treatments. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2015;2015: Article ID: 051015.
  4. Survival of short dental implants ≤7 mm: a review. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2015;2015: Article ID: 011015.
  5. Marginal bone loss in dental implants subjected to early loading (6 to 8 weeks postplacement) with a retrospective short-term follow-up. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 Feb;66(2):246-250.
  6. Cone beam computed tomography functionalities in dentistry. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2015;2015:Article ID: 040515.
  7. Correlation between bone quality evaluated by cone-beam computerised tomography and primary stability. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012 Jul;23(7):832-836.
  8. A proposed radiographic index for assessment of the current status of osseointegration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8(3):323-328.
  9. Comparison of radiographic bone height assessments in panoramic and intraoral radiographs of implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007 Jan-Feb;22(1):96-100.
  10. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983 Sep;50(3):399-410.
  11. A prospective multicenter 5-year radiographic evaluation of crestal bone levels over time in 596 dental implants placed in 192 patients. J Periodontol 2009 May;80(5):725-733.
  12. The predictive value of radiographic diagnosis of implant instability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997 Jan-Feb;12(1):59-64.
  13. Comparison of cone-beam imaging with orthopantomography and computerized tomography for assessment in presurgical implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009 Mar-Apr;24(2):216-225.
  14. Radiographic comparison of the two standardized implants with single wide diameter implant for replacement of one mandibular molar. Asian J Oral Health Allied Sci 2011 Jan-Mar;1(1):4-8.
  15. Interpretation basics of cone beam computed tomography. In: Gonzalez SM, editor. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2015;2015:Article ID: 130115.
  16. Journey from 2-D to 3-D: implant imaging a review. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2014;2014:Article ID: 091114.
  17. Etiology, complications, key systemic and environmental risk factors in dental implant failure. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2015;2015:Article ID: 010615, 2015.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.