The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of Ridge Width for Implant Placement Using Ridge Mapping on the Diagnostic Cast, Cone-beam Computed Tomography, and Direct Surgical Measurements

Sourav Boro Choudhary, Garima Asthana, Rupali Kalsi, Kumar Saurav, Shivesh Kumar Mishra, Shivjot Chhina, Hiba Peku, Zoya Ahmad

Keywords : Alveolar ridge width, Cone-beam computed tomography, Dental implants, Ridge mapping

Citation Information : Choudhary SB, Asthana G, Kalsi R, Saurav K, Mishra SK, Chhina S, Peku H, Ahmad Z. Comparative Evaluation of Ridge Width for Implant Placement Using Ridge Mapping on the Diagnostic Cast, Cone-beam Computed Tomography, and Direct Surgical Measurements. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (2):186-192.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3294

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 10-06-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: This study was undertaken with an objective to find out the accuracy and reliability of presurgical ridge mapping (RM) on a diagnostic cast for linear measurements in the horizontal direction on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and direct surgical assessment. Materials and methods: In total, 25 patients based on inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected. An acrylic stent with two points marked at 3 mm and 6 mm from the soft tissue summit of the alveolar ridge was fabricated. Linear measurements at these points were estimated with three techniques viz. RM on the diagnostic cast, CBCT, and direct surgical in situ measurements after flap reflection. Results: Considering direct in situ surgical measurements as the gold standard with an accuracy of 100%, the accuracy for CBCT and RM on the diagnostic cast was 95.5% and 87.4%, respectively, for the maxillary arch. Whereas the accuracy for CBCT and RM on the diagnostic cast was 88.6% and 92.2%, respectively, for mandibular arch. Conclusion: The three approaches discussed are reliable for the assessment of ridge dimensions in the horizontal direction. Ridge mapping on the diagnostic cast is a simple, precise, noninvasive technique without any radiographic exposure. Clinical significance: Ridge mapping on a diagnostic cast along with two-dimensional (2D) radiography can be used as a valuable chairside diagnostic tool in the treatment planning prior to dental implant placement in the cases of a regular alveolar ridge and even mucosal lining. This clinical technique provides zero radiation exposure and is also cost-effective.

  1. Castro-Ruiz CT, Noriega J, Guerrero ME. Validity of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography in dental implant therapy. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2015;19(3):290–293. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.154189.
  2. Chen LC, Lundgren T, Hallström H, et al. Comparison of different methods of assessing alveolar ridge dimensions prior to dental implant placement. J Periodontol 2008;79(3):401–405. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2008.070021.
  3. Scaf G, Lurie AG, Mosier KM, et al. Dosimetry and cost of imaging osseointegrated implants with film-based and computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1997;83(1):41–48. DOI: 10.1016/s1079-2104(97)90089-5.
  4. Zhang X, Li Y, Ge Z, et al. The dimension and morphology of alveolar bone at maxillary anterior teeth in periodontitis: a retrospective analysis—using CBCT. Int J Oral Sci 2020;12(1):4. DOI: 10.1038/s41368-019-0071-0.
  5. Benavides E, Rios HF, Ganz SD, et al. Use of cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists consensus report. Implant Dent 2012;21(2):78–86. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31824885b5.
  6. Al-Ekrish AA, Ekram M. A comparative study of the accuracy and reliability of multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimensions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40(2):67–75. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/27546065.
  7. Kosalagood P, Silkosessak OC, Pittayapat P, et al. Linear measurement accuracy of eight cone beam computed tomography scanners. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17(6):1217–1227.
  8. Gharpure AS, Latimer JM, Aljofi FE, et al. Role of thin gingival phenotype and inadequate keratinized mucosa width (<2 mm) as risk indicators for peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis. J Periodontol 2021;92(12):1687–1696. DOI: 10.1002/JPER.20-0792.
  9. Zekry A, Wang R, Chau ACM, et al. Facial alveolar bone wall width-a cone-beam computed tomography study in Asians. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25(2):194–206. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12096.
  10. ten Bruggenkate CM, de Rijcke TB, Kraaijenhagen HA, et al. Ridge mapping. Implant Dent 1994;3(3):179–182. DOI: 10.1097/00008505-199409000-00008.
  11. Farzin M, Panahandeh H. Effect of pouring time and storage temperature on dimensional stability of casts made from irreversible hydrocolloid. J Dent (Tehran) 2010;7(4):179–184. PMID: 21998793.
  12. Chugh A, Bhisnoi P, Kalra D, et al. Comparative evaluation of three different methods for evaluating alveolar ridge dimension prior to implant placement: an in vivo study. J Dent Implant 2013;3(2): 101–110.
  13. Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, et al. Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29 Suppl 16:393–415. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13142.
  14. Balaji SS, Bhat V. A study to determine the accuracy of various clinical techniques of ridge mapping before implant fixture placement. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019;20(4):499–503. PMID: 31308284.
  15. Chandraker NK, Chowdhary R, Verma A. Technique to assess the alveolar bone width for immediate implant placement in fresh extraction sockets. Indian J Dent Res 2013;24(6):784–786. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.127637.
  16. Luk LCK, Pow EHN, Li TKL, et al. Comparison of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography for planning dental implant therapy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26(1):70–74. PMID: 21365040.
  17. George JP, Dhir S. Soft tissue and esthetic considerations around implants. J Int Clin Dent Res Organ 2015(3);7:119–131. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0754.172941.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.