Assessing the Accuracy of Linear Alveolar Bone Measurements for Implant Planning Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography by Comparing Three Competent Three-Dimensional Imaging Software: An In Vitro Study.

Autor:	Neralla A; Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND., Mishra S; Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND., Nc S; Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND., Srinivasan B; Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND., Bajoria AA; Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND., Singh D; Periodontology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Cureus [Cureus] 2024 Nov 06; Vol. 16 (11), pp. e73172. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Nov 06 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.7759/cureus.73172
Abstrakt:	Objective: This study aims to assess the accuracy of linear alveolar bone measurements for implant planning using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) by comparing three 3D imaging software: CareStream (Carestream Health, Rochester, New York, United States), RadiAnt (Medixant, Poznan, Poland), and iRYS (Cefla s.c., Imola, Italy). Methods: Twenty-seven dry goat mandibles were used for this in-vitro study. Gutta-percha markers were placed on the mandibles, which were then scanned using a CBCT machine. Linear measurements of the alveolar bone were taken at the implant sites using CareStream, RadiAnt, and iRYS software, and compared to gold-standard measurements obtained using digital Vernier calipers. Measurements included bone height and width, and the absolute measurement errors were calculated to assess accuracy. Results: iRYS consistently provided the most accurate measurements compared to the control, especially at lower error thresholds. RadiAnt tended to overestimate, while CareStream yielded intermediate values. Across all thresholds, iRYS showed the least deviation, followed by CareStream and RadiAnt. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences between the three software programs at higher error thresholds, confirming the reliability of each for implant planning. Conclusion: All three software programs (iRYS, CareStream, and RadiAnt) offered reliable and accurate measurements for implant planning using CBCT, with iRYS being the most accurate. Clinicians can confidently use any of the three, although iRYS may be preferred for cases requiring higher precision. Competing Interests: Human subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve human participants or tissue. Animal subjects: Institutional Ethics Committee of Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences Issued protocol number KIIT/KIMS/IEC/1291/2023. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. (Copyright © 2024, Neralla et al.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu