LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 30 , Issue 5
September/October 2015

Pages 1076-1083


Indications and Frequency for the Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography for Implant Treatment Planning in a Specialty Clinic

Michael M. Bornstein, Prof Dr Med Dent/Odette Engel Brügger, Dr Med Dent/Simone F. M. Janner, Dr Med Dent/Ulrike Kuchler, Dr Med, Dr Med Dent/Vivianne Chappuis, Dr Med Dent/Reinhilde Jacobs, DDS, MSc, PhD, Dr hc/Daniel Buser, Prof Dr Med Dent


PMID: 26394344
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4081

Purpose: To analyze the indications and frequency for three-dimensional (3D) imaging for implant treatment planning in a pool of patients referred to a specialty clinic over a 3-year period. Materials and Methods: All patients who received dental implants between 2008 and 2010 at the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology at the University of Bern were included in the study. The influence of age, gender, and time of treatment (2008 to 2010) on the frequency of use of two-dimensional (2D) radiographic imaging modalities alone or in combination with 3D cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans was analyzed. Furthermore, the influence of the indication, location, and need for bone augmentation on the frequency of use of 2D imaging modalities alone or in combination with CBCT was evaluated. Results: In all, 1,568 patients (792 women and 776 men) received 2,279 implants. Overall, 633 patients (40.4%) were analyzed with 2D imaging procedures alone. CBCT was performed in 935 patients (59.6%). There was a statistically significant increase in CBCT between 2008 and 2010. Patients older than 55 years received a CBCT scan in addition to 2D radiographic imaging statistically significantly more often. Additional 3D imaging was most frequently performed in the posterior maxilla, whereas 2D radiographs alone exhibited the highest frequency in the anterior mandible. The combination of 2D with CBCT was used predominantly for implant placement with simultaneous or staged guided bone regeneration or sinus elevation. Conclusion: Based on these findings from a specialty clinic, the use of additional CBCT imaging for implant treatment planning is influenced by the indication, location, local anatomy (including the need for bone augmentation), and the age of the patient.


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help