Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Radiographic Assessment for Implants in the Aesthetic Zone

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Implants in the Aesthetic Zone

Abstract

This chapter reviews the 2D and 3D imaging modalities available to the dental practitioner planning implants in the aesthetic zone while focusing on the unique advantages of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). An overview of the basic principles and technical parameters of CBCT technology is reviewed in order to offer guidelines for maximizing image quality. A systematic methodology for CBCT evaluation is then introduced to ensure comprehensive evaluation of the imaged volume while emphasizing the important anatomic considerations at the dental implant recipient site. The most common anatomic variants and osseous pathology encountered in the aesthetic zone are surveyed, with special regard to implications for dental implant therapy. Finally, in silico treatment planning and guided surgery are introduced as CBCT-based tools to enhance the likelihood of a successful surgical and prosthetic outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, Ganz SD, Hildebolt C, Scarfe WC. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113(6):817–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mupparapu M, Singer SR. Implant imaging for the dentist. J Can Dent Assoc. 2004;70(1):32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nair MK, Nair UP. Digital and advanced imaging in endodontics: a review. J Endod. 2007;33(1):1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chan HL, Misch K, Wang HL. Dental imaging in implant treatment planning. Implant Dent. 2010;19(4):288–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Benavides E, Rios HF, Ganz SD, et al. Use of cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists consensus report. Implant Dent. 2012;21(2):78–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Guerrero ME, Noriega J, Castro C, Jacobs R. Does cone-beam CT alter treatment plans? Comparison of preoperative implant planning using panoramic versus cone-beam CT images. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014;44(2):121–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yim JH, Ryu DM, Lee BS, Kwon YD. Analysis of digitalized panorama and cone beam computed tomographic image distortion for the diagnosis of dental implant surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2011;22(2):669–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37(1):10–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mallya SM. Evidence and professional guidelines for appropriate use of cone beam computed tomography. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2015;43(9):512–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52(4):707–730, v.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(6):609–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nemtoi A, Czink C, Haba D, Gahleitner A. Cone beam CT: a current overview of devices. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(8):20120443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Klokkevold PR. Cone beam computed tomography for the dental implant patient. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2015;43(9):521–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mallya SM. Principles of cone beam computed tomography. 3D imaging in endodontics. Berlin: Springer; 2016. p. 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Carter L, Farman AG, Geist J, et al. American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology executive opinion statement on performing and interpreting diagnostic cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;106(4):561–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Loukas M, Kinsella CR Jr, Kapos T, Tubbs RS, Ramachandra S. Anatomical variation in arterial supply of the mandible with special regard to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;37(4):367–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yonetsu K, Yuasa K, Kanda S. Idiopathic osteosclerosis of the jaws: panoramic radiographic and computed tomographic findings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997;83(4):517–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang W, Skrypczak A, Weltman R. Anterior maxilla alveolar ridge dimension and morphology measurement by cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) for immediate implant treatment planning. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15:65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Oliveira-Santos C, Rubira-Bullen IR, Monteiro SA, León JE, Jacobs R. Neurovascular anatomical variations in the anterior palate observed on CBCT images. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(9):1044–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Russell KA, Folwarczna MA. Mesiodens-diagnosis and management of a common supernumerary tooth. J Can Dent Assoc. 2003;69(6):362–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Uchida Y, Noguchi N, Goto M, et al. Measurement of anterior loop length for the mandibular canal and diameter of the mandibular incisive canal to avoid nerve damage when installing endosseous implants in the interforaminal region: a second attempt introducing cone beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(4):744–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gahleitner A, Watzek G, Imhof H. Dental CT: imaging technique, anatomy, and pathologic conditions of the jaws. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(2):366–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Alsufyani NA, Lam E. Osseous (cemento-osseous) dysplasia of the jaws: clinical and radiographic analysis. J Can Dent Assoc. 2011;77:b70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. de Oliveira BH. Compound odontoma-diagnosis and treatment: three case reports. Pediatr Dent. 2001;23(2):151–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. New York: Elsevier; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Al-Sabbagh M. Implants in the esthetic zone. Dent Clin. 2006;50(3):391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jivraj S, Chee W. Treatment planning of implants in the aesthetic zone. Br Dent J. 2006;201(2):77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. J Periodontol. 2003;74(4):557–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Oliveira ML, Tosoni GM, Lindsey DH, Mendoza K, Tetradis S, Mallya SM. Influence of anatomical location on CT numbers in cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013;115(4):558–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pauwels R, Jacobs R, Singer SR, Mupparapu M. CBCT-based bone quality assessment: are Hounsfield units applicable? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(1):20140238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pauwels R, Nackaerts O, Bellaiche N, et al. Variability of dental cone beam CT grey values for density estimations. Br J Radiol. 2013;86(1021):20120135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Mohammed A. Husain & Sotirios Tetradis

Authors
  1. Mohammed A. Husain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sotirios Tetradis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed A. Husain .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Constitutive and Regenerative Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Todd R. Schoenbaum

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Husain, M.A., Tetradis, S. (2019). Radiographic Assessment for Implants in the Aesthetic Zone. In: Schoenbaum, T. (eds) Implants in the Aesthetic Zone. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72601-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72601-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72600-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72601-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation