Evaluation of artifacts generated by titanium, zirconium, and titanium–zirconium alloy dental implants on MRI, CT, and CBCT images: A phantom study

Kocasaraç, Hüsniye Demirtürk; Ustaoğlu, Gülbahar; Bayrak, Seval; Katkar, Rujuta; Geha, Hassem; Deahl, S. Thomas; Mealey, Brian L.; Danacı, Murat; Noujeim, Marcel

doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2019.01.074

Cited by 47 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 a–c) and 2.5D-C/C composites (Fig. 6 d–f) have no scattering, which is consistent with experimental observation in the literature 36 , 37 . It could be deduced that 3D-C/C composites implants have almost no influence on the medical CT imaging, implying the implants do not affect the diagnosis and treatment of subsequent diseases of patients.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Synthesis, structure, and properties of carbon/carbon composites artificial rib for chest wall reconstruction

Zhou-jian

Zhang²,

Ruan

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, braided carbon fiber reinforced carbon matrix composites (3D-C/C composites) are prepared by chemical vapor infiltration process. Their composite structure, mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and in vivo experiments are investigated and compared with those of traditional 2.5D-C/C composites and titanium alloys TC4. The results show that 3D-C/C composites are composed of reinforced braided carbon fiber bundles and pyrolytic carbon matrix and provide 51% open pores with a size larger than 100 μm for tissue adhesion and growth. The Young’s modulus of 3D-C/C composites is about 5 GPa, much smaller than those of 2.5D-C/C composites and TC4, while close to the autogenous bone. 3D-C/C composites have a higher tensile strength (167 MPa) and larger elongation (5.0%) than 2.5D-C/C composites (81 MPa and 0.7%), and do not show obvious degradation after 1 × 106 cyclic tensile loading. The 3D-C/C composites display good biocompatibility and have almost no artifacts on CT imaging. The in vivo experiment reveals that 3D-C/C composites artificial ribs implanted in dogs do not show displacement or fracture in 1 year, and there are no obvious proliferation and inflammation in the soft tissues around 3D-C/C composites implant. Our findings demonstrate that 3D-C/C composites are suitable for chest wall reconstruction and present great potentials in artificial bones.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Synthesis, structure, and properties of carbon/carbon composites artificial rib for chest wall reconstruction

Zhou-jian

Zhang²,

Ruan

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They concluded that both voxel sizes were similar to detect peri-implant fenestrations and defects [ 12 ].. Demirtürk et al found a significant difference in their study between images acquired with higher resolution (0.2 mm and 0.25 mm voxel sizes) compared with those acquired with lower resolution (0.3 mm and 0.4 mm voxel sizes) with voxel sizes of 0.3 and 0.4 mm producing fewer artifacts. This result is in line with this current study which concluded as the moderate voxel sizes (0.150 or 0.200 mm 3 ) showed higher agreement [ 48 ]. The present study showed a significant difference in detecting peri-implant fenestrations in different voxel resolutions both in zirconium and titanium implants.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Demirtürk et al also evaluated artifacts generated by zirconium, titanium, and titanium-zirconium alloy implants using different imaging modalities including CBCT in different voxel resolutions. They concluded that they found less artifacts for titanium and titanium-zirconium implants than zirconium implants [ 48 ]. Similarly, Bayrak et al evaluated the same types of implants to detect of peri-implant dehiscences on CBCT images.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the different voxel sizes in the estimation of peri-implant fenestration defects using cone beam computed tomography: an ex vivo study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To examine the influence of voxel sizes to detect of peri-implant fenestration defects on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. Materials and methods This study performed with three sheep heads both maxilla and mandible and two types of dental implant type 1 zirconium implant (Zr40) (n = 6) and type 2 titanium implant (Ti22) (n = 10). A total of 14 peri-implant fenestrations (8 buccal surfaces, 6 palatal/lingual surface) were created while 18 surfaces (8 buccal, 10 palatal/lingual) were free of fenestrations. Three observers have evaluated the images of fenestration at each site. Images obtained with 0.75 mm3, 0.100 mm3, 0.150 mm3, 0.200 mm3, and 0.400 mm3 voxel sizes. For intra- and inter-observer agreements for each voxel size, Kappa coefficients were calculated. Results Intra- and inter-observer kappa values were the highest for 0.150 mm3, and the lowest in 0.75 mm3 and 0.400 mm3 voxel sizes for all types of implants. The highest area under the curve (AUC) values were found higher for the scan mode of 0.150 mm3, whereas lower AUC values were found for the voxel size for 0.400 mm3. Titanium implants had higher AUC values than zirconium with the statistical significance for all voxel sizes (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion A voxel size of 0.150 mm3 can be used to detect peri-implant fenestration bone defects. CBCT is the most reliable diagnostic tool for peri-implant fenestration bone defects.

show abstract

“…Emerging evidence indicates CBCT limitations in imaging peri‐implant bone are due to the presence of artifacts (Demirturk Kocasarac et al., 2019; Jacobs et al., 2018; Vanderstuyft et al., 2019). They are in the forms of streaks, lines and shadows oriented along the radiation projection pathway, potentially degrading the image quality as shown in Figure 2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive peri‐implant tissue evaluation with ultrasonography and cone‐beam computed tomography: A pilot study

Siqueira

Sinjab

Pan³

et al. 2021

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The aim of the present study was to explore the feasibility of ultrasonography (US) for clinical imaging of peri‐implant tissues. Material and Methods Patients with ≥1 implant, a cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan, an US scan, and clinical photographs taken during the surgery were included. The crestal bone thickness (CBT) and facial bone level (FBL) were measured on both US and CBCT modalities, and direct FBL measurements were also made on clinical images. US measurements were compared with CBCT and direct readings. Results A total of eight implants from four patients were included. For FBL measurements, US and direct (r2 = 0.95) as well as US and CBCT (r2 = 0.85) were highly correlated, whereas CBCT correlated satisfactorily with the direct reading (r2 = 0.75). In one implant without facial bone, CBCT was not able to measure CBT and FBL accurately. The estimated bias for CBT readings was 0.17 ± 0.23 mm (p = .10) between US and CBCT. US blood flow imaging was successfully recorded and showed a wide dynamic range among patients with different degrees of clinical inflammation. Conclusion US is a feasible method to evaluate peri‐implant facial crestal bone dimensions. Additional US features, for example, functional blood flow imaging, may be useful to estimate the extent and severity of inflammation.

show abstract

Evaluation of artifacts generated by titanium, zirconium, and titanium–zirconium alloy dental implants on MRI, CT, and CBCT images: A phantom study

Cited by 47 publications

References 24 publications

Synthesis, structure, and properties of carbon/carbon composites artificial rib for chest wall reconstruction

Synthesis, structure, and properties of carbon/carbon composites artificial rib for chest wall reconstruction

Comparison of the different voxel sizes in the estimation of peri-implant fenestration defects using cone beam computed tomography: an ex vivo study

Comprehensive peri‐implant tissue evaluation with ultrasonography and cone‐beam computed tomography: A pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About