Advertisement

Evaluation of maxillary trabecular microstructure as an indicator of implant stability by using 2 cone beam computed tomography systems and micro-computed tomography

Published:December 01, 2018DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2018.11.014

      Objective

      The aim of this study was to assess the trabecular microarchitecture of the maxilla by using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) ex vivo.

      Study Design

      Seventeen maxillary cadaver specimens were scanned by using micro-CT and CBCT devices. Samples were scanned with 2 CBCT devices at different voxel sizes (0.08, 0.125, and 0.160 mm for 3-D Accuitomo 170; 0.75 and 0.200 mm for Planmeca Promax 3-D Max). Morphometric parameters, such as bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) ratio, trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular separation (Tb.Sp), trabecular number (Tb.N), and degree of anisotropy (DA) were assessed by using CTAnalyzer software. Bland-Altman limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were performed to evaluate agreement between CBCT and micro-CT in consideration of measured morphometric parameters. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.

      Results

      The BV/TV, Tb.Th, Tb.Sp, and DA values were higher for CBCT images compared with micro-CT images, whereas the Tb.N value was lower with CBCT images than with micro-CT images. The BV/TV and DA parameters showed the highest agreement between CBCT and micro-CT devices (ICC = 0.421 for BV/TV and ICC = 0.439 for DA; P < .01).

      Conclusions

      The BV/TV and DA parameters measured on CBCT obtained at the smallest voxel size were found to be useful for the assessment of maxillary trabecular microstructure.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      References

        • Bryant SR
        The effects of age, jaw site, and bone condition on oral implant outcomes.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1998; 11: 470-490
        • Cassetta M
        • Stefanelli LV
        • Pacifici A
        • Pacifici L
        • Barbato E
        How accurate is CBCT in measuring bone density? A comparative CBCT-CT in vitro study.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014; 16: 471-478
        • Kang SR
        • Bok SC
        • Choi SC
        • et al.
        The relationship between dental implant stability and trabecular bone structure using cone-beam computed tomography.
        J Periodont Implant Sci. 2016; 46: 116-127
        • Parsa A
        • Ibrahim N
        • Hassan B
        • van der Stelt P
        • Wismeijer D
        Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 26: e1-e7
        • Kim JE
        • Yi WJ
        • Heo MS
        • Lee SS
        • Choi SC
        • Huh KH
        Three-dimensional evaluation of human jaw bone microarchitecture: correlation between the microarchitectural parameters of cone beam computed tomography and micro-computer tomography.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015; 120: 762-770
        • Drage NA
        • Palmer RM
        • Blake G
        • Wilson R
        • Crane F
        • Fogelman I
        A comparison of bone mineral density in the spine, hip and jaws of edentulous patients.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18: 496-500
        • Huh KH
        • Yi WJ
        • Jeon IS
        • et al.
        Relationship between two-dimensional and three-dimensional bone architecture in predicting the mechanical strength of the pig mandible.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 101: 363-373
        • Panmekiate S
        • Ngonphloy N
        • Charoenkarn T
        • Faruangsaeng T
        • Pauwels R
        Comparison of mandibular bone microarchitecture between micro-CT and CBCT images.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 4420140322
        • van Eijden TM
        • van der Helm PN
        • van Ruijven LJ
        • Mulder L
        Structural and mechanical properties of mandibular condylar bone.
        J Dent Res. 2006; 85: 33-37
        • Müller R
        • van Campenhout H
        • van Damme B
        • et al.
        Morphometric analysis of human bone biopsies: a quantitative structural comparison of histologic sections and micro-computed tomography.
        Bone. 1998; 23: 59-66
        • Swain MV
        • Xue J
        State of the art of Micro-CT applications in dental research.
        Int J Oral Sci. 2009; 1: 177-188
        • González-García R
        • Monje F
        Is micro-computed tomography reliable to determine the microstructure of the maxillary alveolar bone?.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 730-737
        • Van Dessel J
        • Huang Y
        • Depypere M
        • Rubira-Bullen I
        • Maes F
        • Jacobs R
        A comparative evaluation of cone beam CT and micro-CT on trabecular bone structures in the human mandible.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013; 4220130145
        • Ibrahim N
        • Parsa A
        • Hassan B
        • van der Stelt P
        • Aartman IHA
        • Wismeijer D
        Accuracy of trabecular bone microstructural measurement at planned dental implant sites using cone-beam CT data sets.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25: 941-945
        • Huang HL
        • Chen MY
        • Hsu Li YF
        • Chang CH
        • Chen KT
        Three-dimensional bone structure and bone mineral density evaluations of autogenous bone graft after sinus augmentation: a microcomputed tomography analysis.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 1098-1103
        • Hashimoto K
        • Kawashima S
        • Araki M
        • Iwai K
        • Sawada K
        • Akiyama Y
        Comparison of image performance between cone-beam computed tomography for dental use and four-row multidetector helical CT.
        J Oral Sci. 2006; 48: 27-34
        • Monje A
        • Monje F
        • González-García R
        • Galindo-Moreno P
        • Rodriguez-Salvanes F
        • Wang HL
        Comparison between microcomputed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography radiologic bone to assess atrophic posterior maxilla density and microarchitecture.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25: 723-728
        • Bland JM
        • Altman DG
        Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.
        Lancet. 1986; 1: 307-310
        • Wirth AJ
        • Goldhahn J
        • Flaig C
        • Arbenz P
        • Müller R
        • van Lenthe GH
        Implant stability is affected by local bone microstructural quality.
        Bone. 2011; 49: 473-478
        • Fanuscu MI
        • Chang TL
        Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of human cadaver bone: microstructural data from maxilla and mandible.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004; 15: 213-218
        • González-García R
        • Monje F
        The reliability of cone-beam computed tomography to assess bone density at dental implant recipient sites: a histomorphometric analysis by micro-CT.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 871-879
        • Parfitt AM
        • Drezner MK
        • Glorieux FH
        • et al.
        Bone histomorphometry: standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units: report of the ASBMR histomorphometry nomenclature committee.
        J Bone Miner Res. 2009; 2: 595-610
        • Naitoh M
        • Hirukawa A
        • Katsumata A
        • Ariji E
        Prospective study to estimate mandibular cancellous bone density using large volume cone-beam computed tomography.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010; 21: 1309-1313
        • Liang X
        • Jacobs R
        • Hassan B
        • et al.
        A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT): Part I. On subjective image quality.
        Eur J Radiol. 2010; 75: 265-269
        • van Dessel J
        • Nicolielo LF
        • Huang Y
        • et al.
        Quantification of bone quality using different cone beam computed tomography devices: accuracy assessment for edentulous human mandibles.
        Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016; 9: 411-424
        • Bechara B
        • McMahan CA
        • Moore WS
        • Noujeim M
        • Geha H
        Contrast-to-noise ratio with different large volumes in a cone-beam computerized tomography machine: an in vitro study.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012; 114: 658-665
        • Vandenberghe B
        • Luchsinger S
        • Hostens J
        • Dhoore E
        • Jacobs R
        • SEDENTEXCT Project Consortium TSP
        The influence of exposure parameters on jawbone model accuracy using cone beam CT and multislice CT.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012; 41: 466-474
        • Pauwels R
        • Faruangsaeng T
        • Charoenkarn T
        • Ngonphloy N
        • Panmekiate S
        Effect of exposure parameters and voxel size on bone structure analysis in CBCT.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 4420150078
        • Ritman EL
        Micro-computed tomography-current status and developments.
        Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2004; 6: 185-208
        • Kamburoğlu K
        • Yeta EN
        • Yılmaz F
        An ex vivo comparison of diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in the detection of furcal perforations.
        J Endod. 2015; 41: 696-702
        • Pauwels R
        • Beinsberger J
        • Collaert B
        • et al.
        Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners.
        Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81: 267-271