Use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Early Detection of Implant Failure

The Use of Cone‐Beam Computed Tomography in Management of Patients Requiring Dental Implants: An American Academy of Periodontology Best Evidence Review

“…This section includes studies where implant fate evaluation was the main goal. Within this scope, understanding whether CBCT will detect these defects earlier than other imaging modalities and if these early detections will have an effect on the overall prognosis of the implants is a matter of current investigation 38‐43 …”

“…Within this scope, understanding whether CBCT will detect these defects earlier than other imaging modalities and if these early detections will have an effect on the overall prognosis of the implants is a matter of current investigation. [38][39][40][41][42][43] Monitoring the bone and tissue condition around dental implants is essential not only during follow-up evaluation under functional loading but also during the assessment of strategies for regenerating peri-implant bone. 39 However, the use of CBCT for this particular application remains questionable as it is known that periapical radiographs with a strict projection protocol can assess mesial and distal peri-implant bone levels almost as accurately as histologic studies, assuming that the projected level of peri-implant bone is located in the sectioning plane of the implant or is of uniform height around the implant.…”

The efficacy of metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm in cone‐beam computed tomography on the diagnostic accuracy of fenestration and dehiscence around dental implants

“…Although CBCT imaging is acceptable to detect bony defects around teeth, the ability of this modality to detect such lesions around dental implants is questionable . One important factor that may limit this ability is the artifacts of dental implants, which may hide the bony margin around them . Filtration (removing the lower‐energy photons by a piece of metallic material), calibration correction (calibrating the scanner by means of phantoms in different sizes), and beam hardening correction software (which minimizes blurring the bone‐soft tissue interface and decreases the emergence of dark bands) are used to reduce this potential cause of image degradation .…”

“…[8][9][10] One important factor that may limit this ability is the artifacts of dental implants, which may hide the bony margin around them. 9,[11][12][13] Filtration (removing the lower-energy photons by a piece of metallic material), calibration correction (calibrating the scanner by means of phantoms in different sizes), and beam hardening correction software (which minimizes blurring the bone-soft tissue interface and decreases the emergence of dark bands) are used to reduce this potential cause of image degradation. 6 Metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm has been introduced as a post-processing step during the image reconstruction.…”

Fabrication of a Simple Acrylic Template to Standardize Periapical Radiographs for Implants Retaining Mandibular Bar Overdentures

“…[2][3][4][5] The clinical value of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for assessment of osseointegrated implants is restricted because of beam hardening artifacts. 1,3,4,6,7 Therefore, a periapical radiographic imaging system (conventional or digital) is still the most suitable for evaluating peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL) with the advantage of minimal radiation dose. 1,5,8 Measuring MBL mesially and distally on the implants using the threads as a measuring scale is another benefit.…”