Volume 27, Issue 5 pp. 529-534
Original Article

Detection of peri-implant bone defects with different radiographic techniques – a human cadaver study

Sebastian Kühl

Corresponding Author

Sebastian Kühl

Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral Medicine, School of Dental Medicine University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Both authors contributed equally to this work.

Corresponding author:

Sebastian Kühl

Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral Medicine, School of Dental Medicine University of Basel, Hebelstrasse 3, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland

Tel.: +41 61 267 2611

Fax: +41 61 267 2607

e-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Silvia Zürcher

Silvia Zürcher

Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral Medicine, School of Dental Medicine University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Both authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this author
Nicola U. Zitzmann

Nicola U. Zitzmann

Clinic for Periodontology, Endodontics and Cariology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
Andreas Filippi

Andreas Filippi

Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral Medicine, School of Dental Medicine University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
Michael Payer

Michael Payer

Department of Oral Surgery and Radiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Dorothea Dagassan-Berndt

Dorothea Dagassan-Berndt

Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral Medicine, School of Dental Medicine University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 07 June 2015
Citations: 56

Abstract

Objectives

Two- and three-dimensional radiographic techniques are available to determine peri-implantitis-related bone loss around dental implants.

Purpose

To compare the performance of detecting different peri-implant bone defects in intraoral radiography (IR), panoramic radiography (PR), Cone Beam Computer Tomography (CBCT) and Computer Tomography (CT).

Material and methods

Six implants were inserted under ideal conditions into the lower jaw of an edentulous human cadaver. IR, PR, CBCT and CT were performed. Two-wall, three-wall and four-wall defects with 1 mm depth were artificially created around two of the implants (one anterior and one posterior), and radiographies were repeated. The identical set-up was used for 3-mm-deep bone defects. All images were presented to seven observers. Sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) were determined for each modality, defect type and depths, and likelihood ratios were calculated.

Results

The highest sensitivity was found with IR and CBCT for 1 mm (0.67; 0.68) and 3-mm defects (0.81; 0.79). The highest specificity was found with IR for both defect depths (0.51). The best classification of defect type revealed PR for both 1-mm and 3-mm-deep defects. Both likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR−) were best for IR with 1-mm (1.37 and 0.65) and with 3-mm defects (1.65 and 0.37).

Conclusions

IR should still be recommended as favourable method evaluating bone loss around dental implants, while CT demonstrated the lowest performance in detecting peri-implant bone defects.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.