Effect of metal artefact reduction level on the assessment of dental implant positioning by cone-beam computed tomography.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of metal artefact reduction (MAR) level and tube current on the assessment of dental implant positioning relative to the mandibular canal (MC) through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Titanium dental implants were placed in dried mandibles at 0.5-mm superior to the MC (group 1/n = 8) and 0.5-mm inside the MC with perforation of the cortex (group 2/n = 10). CBCT scans were obtained with different levels of MAR (off, medium, and high) and 2 tube currents (4 and 8 mA). Four examiners analysed the images and scored the contact between the implant and the MC using a 5-point scale. Sensitivity, specificity, area under receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), and frequency of scores were calculated. Data were compared with analysis of variance 2-way and Tukey's test and scores with Chi-square test. RESULTS: Specificity and area under ROC curve decreased significantly when MAR level was high compared with MAR-medium and MAR-off. The frequency of score 3 (inconclusive) was the highest, and scores 1 and 5 (definitely no contact and definitely contact, respectively) were the lowest with MAR-high, regardless of the tube current. When MAR was off, there were higher frequencies of scores 1 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: The level of MAR influences the assessment of the relationship between the dental implant and the MC. MAR-high led to lower diagnostic accuracy compared with MAR-medium and off. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This article shows that high level of MAR can interfere in the diagnostic of dental implant positioning relative to the MC, decreasing its accuracy.

Influence of metal artefact reduction on the diagnosis of contact between implant and mandibular canal in cone beam computed tomography: An ex-vivo study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of metal artefact reduction (MAR) in the diagnosis of dental implant contact with the mandibular canal (MC) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Dental implants were installed with surgical guides in the posterior hemiarches of 10 dry human mandibles: 0.5 mm above to the MC cortex (G1/n = 8) and 0.5 mm inside the MC (G2/n = 10). The experimental set-up was scanned with two CBCT equipment using 85 kV and 90 kV, MAR ON or OFF, and different tube currents (4 mA, 8 mA and 10 mA). Two dentomaxillofacial radiologists (DMFRs) and two dentists (DDS) scored the relation between the dental implant and MC. Descriptive statistics were used to observe the absolute frequency of scores. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated considering the known relation between the dental implant and the MC interior. McNemar's test (α = .05) was applied to compare the diagnostic efficacy of MAR ON versus MAR OFF. RESULTS: Overall specificity was higher than sensitivity for both DDS and DMFR (97% vs. 50% and 92.0% vs. 78.0% respectively). There was a significant effect of MAR (p = .031) for DMFR in the case of contact between the dental implant with the MC interior, in which sensitivity decreased with MAR activation from 90% to 40%. DMFR observers showed a better diagnostic performance compared with the DDS observers (accuracy of 84.0% and 71.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limited efficacy of MAR, it should not be used when conducting CBCT scans for the evaluation of contact between the implant and the mandibular canal.

Digital photography vs. clinical assessment of resin composite restorations.

PURPOSE: To compare direct clinical and indirect digital photographic assessment of resin composite restorations. Ninety-two posterior resin composite restorations were classified using World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria by two different clinical examiners (C1 and C2). In the same appointment of clinical assessment, intraoral high-quality digital photographs were taken and posteriorly two different digital examiners (D1 and D2) classified the images of each restoration. Restorations of each patient were assessed once by C1 and C2 independently. D1 and D2 assessed the digital images from different locations and in different time. Data were analyzed using the Cohen's kappa coefficient, Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test and Dunn's multiple shared test, with 95% confidence. Agreement levels varied from very good (0.81-1.00) to fair (0.21-0.40). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between assessments were found for surface lustre, staining, color match and translucency, esthetic anatomical form, fracture of material and retention and marginal adaptation. The classification of the resin composite restorations varied significantly according to clinical or high-quality digital photographic assessments. Overall, clinical assessment detected more demand for repair or replacement.

Influence of 2D vs 3D imaging and professional experience on dental implant treatment planning.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether professional experience and type of image examination (panoramic radiography (PAN) or cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)) could influence the pre-surgical planning for dental implant treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six dentists, from two different levels of experience (senior (Sr) and junior (Jr)) performed simulated pre-surgical planning by using PANs and after 1 month, by using CBCTs, considering implant length (IL), implant width (IW), need for bone graft (BG), and other surgical procedures (OP). Bland-Altman test and Kappa coefficient were used to identify agreements. RESULTS: Bland-Altman test showed good agreement in the plans for inter-professional (i.e., Sr vs Jr) comparisons. Bland-Altman plots displayed intra-observer agreement (i.e., differences between PAN and CBCT), showing discrepancy between imaging modalities for IL and a tendency towards selecting larger dental implant options when using PAN and smaller options with CBCT. Kappa showed almost perfect (0.81-1.0) agreement between Jr and Sr for OP (PAN and CBCT). For BG, agreement was substantial (0.61-0.80) when planning was done with PAN and CBCT. Descriptive statistics showed evidence that when Jrs used CBCT, they no longer indicated the BG they had planned when they used PAN. CONCLUSION: There were differences in the pre-surgical planning for treatment with dental implants depending on the professional experience and the type of imaging examination used. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Variation in dental implant planning can affect treatment time, cost, and morbidity in patients.

Clinical, double blind, randomized controlled trial of experimental adhesive protocols in caries-affected dentin.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations regarding experimental and regular adhesive protocols in caries affected-dentin (CAD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 92 class I and class II cavities with carious lesions were selected and randomly assigned to the following groups: (1) bioactive glass-ceramic powder/two-step etch and rinse system, (2) control/two-step etch and rinse system, (3) bioactive glass-ceramic powder/two-step self-etching system, and (4) control/two-step self-etching system. Two operators carried out the adhesive protocols and restored the cavities with a nano-hybrid resin composite. Participants were followed up at 1 week and 6, 12, and 18 months for clinical evaluation performed by two blinded examiners and calibrated according to FDI criteria. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests with a confidence of 95%. RESULTS: The clinical performance of resin composite restoration was not affected by the experimental use of an adhesive protocol including a bioactive glass-ceramic powder for 18 months post-procedure. However, there was a significant difference between group 2 and group 4 (p < 0.05) for marginal adaptation (18 months). Group 2 was significantly different from group 3 (p < 0.05) for fracture of material/retention (18 months) and marginal adaptation (1 week); group 2 showed a better performance. CONCLUSION: Adhesive protocols can alter the clinical performance of posterior restorations in terms of marginal adaptation and the fracture of material/retention in CAD. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Adhesive protocols may influence the success of resin composite restorations in CAD; this is important because failure can lead to caries, re-incidence, and/or clinical re-work.