The Effect of the Axial Plane on Measurement of Available Bone Height for Dental Implant in Computed Tomography of the Mandible

하악의 전산화 단층사진에서 횡단면이 임플랜트를 위한 가용골 높이의 결정에 미치는 영향

  • Jhin, Min-Ju (Department of Periodontology, Graduate School, Seoul National University)
  • 진민주 (서울대학교 대학원 치의학과 치주과학 전공)
  • Published : 2002.06.30

Abstract

For the success of dental implant, accurate radiographic evaluation is prerequisite for planning the location of the osseointegrated implants and avoiding injury to vital structures. CT/MPR(computed tomography/multiplanar reformation) shows improved visualization of inferior alveolar canal. In order to obtain cross-sectional images parallel to the teeth, the occlusal plane is used to orientate for the axial plane. If the direction of axial plane is not parallel to the occlusal plane, the reformatted cross-sectional scans will be oblique to the planned fixture direction and will not show the actual dimension of the planned fixture's location. If the available bone height which measured in the cross-sectional view is much greater than the actual available bone height, penetration of canal may occur. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of the axial plane to measurement of available bone height for dental implant in computed tomography of the mandible. 40 patients who had made radiographic stents and had taken CT were selected. The sites that were included in the study were 45 molar regions. In the central panoramic scan, the length from alveolar crest to superior border of inferior alveolar canal(available bone height, ABH) was measured in direction of reformatted cross-sectional plane(uncorrected ABH). Then, length from alveolar crest to superior border of canal was measured in direction of stent(corrected ABH). The angle between uncorrected ABH and corrected ABH was measured. From each ABH, available fixture length was decided by $Br{{\aa}}nemark$ system. The results were following ; the difference between two ABHs was statistically significant in both first and second molar(p< 0.01). The percentage of difference more than 1 mm was 8.7% in first molar and 15.5% in second molar. The percentage of difference more than 2 mm was 2.0% in first molar and 6.6% in second molar. The maximum value of difference was 2.5 mm in first molar and 2.2 mm in second molar. The correlations between difference of 2 ABHs and angle was positive correlations in both first and second molar. The correlation coefficient was 0.534 in first molar and 0.728 in second molar. The second molar has a stronger positive correlation. The percentage of disagreement between 2 fixture lengths from two ABHs was 24.4% in first molar and 28.9% in second molar.

임플랜트의 성공을 위해서 정확한 방사선학적 검사는 가용골의 높이와 하악관의 위치를 평가하고 중요구조물의 손상을 방지하는데 있어 필수적이다. CT촬영법 중 영상재구성법을 이용한 방법(CT/MPR)은 하악관의 위치를 잘 보여준다. 치아에 평행한 협설 단면 (cross-sectional plane)을 얻기 위해서는 횡단면(axial plane)이 교합면과 평행하도록 해야 한다. 횡단면(axial plane)이 교합면과 평행하지 않으면 재구성된 협설 단면(cross-sectional plane)은 계획된 fixture의 방향과 각을 이루게 되어 그 fixture의 실제 dimension을 보여주지 못하게 된다. 협설단면(cross-sectional view)에서 측정한 가용골 높이가 실제 가용골 높이보다 너무 큰 경우, 수술시 하악관을 침범할 가능성이 있게 된다. 이 연구의 목적은 하악 임플랜트 CT 촬영시 횡단면이 임플란트를 위한 가용골 높이의 측정에 미치는 영향을 알아보는 것이다. 하악 대구치 부위의 임플랜트를 계획하고 radiographic stent를 만든 후 치과 방사사선과에서 하악 임플랜트 CT를 촬영한 40명의 환자, 45개 부위를 선택하였다. 임플랜트 CT의 central panoramic view에서 치조정과 하악관, stent를 tracing한 후, 치조정과 하악관간의 거리(available bone height, ABH)를 재구성된 협설단면상에서 측정하였다(uncorrected ABH). 다음으로, .stent 방향으로 그은 직선상에서 측정하였다(corrected ABH). 두 거리사이의 각을 측정하였다. 두 거리로부터 각각 fixture의 길이를 결정하였다. 연구 결과, 두 가용골의 높이간에는 제 1 대구치와 제 2 대구치에서 모두 유의성있는 차이를 보였다 (p<0.001). 차이가 1 mm 이상인 경우는 제 1 대구치에서 8.7%, 제 2 대구치에서 15.5% 였다. 차이가 2 mm 이상인 경우는 제 1 대구치에서 2.0%, 제 2 대구치에서 6.6%였다. 최대값은 제 1 대구치에서 2.5 mm, 제 2 대구치에서 2.2 mm 였다. 두 가용골의 높이차와 각과의 상관 관계는 제 1 대구치와 제 2 대구치에서 모두 양의 상관관계를 보였다. 상관 계수는 제 1 대구치에서 0.534, 제 2 대구치에서 0.728 였다. 제 2 대구치가 더 강한 양의 상관관계를 보였다. 두 가용골의 높이로부터 결정한 fixture의 길이가 일치하지 않는 경우는 제 1 대구치에서는 24.4%, 제 2 대구치에서는 28.9%였다.

Keywords

References

  1. World Workshop in Periodontics. Con- sensus report implant theraph II. Annals Peirodontol 1996;1:816-820 https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.1996.1.1.816
  2. Ekestubbe A, Grondahl H-G. Relia- bility of spiral tomography with the Scanora technique for dental implant planning. Clin Oral Impl Res 1993; 4:327-332
  3. Klinge, Petersson A, Maly P. Location of the mandibular canal : Comparison of macroscopic findings, conventional radiography, and com- puted tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:327-332
  4. Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B. Visualization of the mandibular canal by different radographic techniques. Clin Oral Impl Rs 1992;3:90-97 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030207.x
  5. Sonick M, Abrahams J, Faiella RA. A comparison of th accuracy of periapical, panoramic and computerized tomographic radiographs in locating th mandibular canal. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:455-460
  6. Todd AD, Gher Me, Quintero G, Richardson AC. Interpretation of linear and computed tomograms in the assessment of implant recipient sites. J Periodontol 1993;64:1243-1249 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1993.64.12.1243
  7. Alder ME, Deahl ST, MAtteson SR. Clinical usefulness of two-dimensional reformatted and three-dimenstionally rendered computerized tomographic images: literature review and a survey of surgeons' opinions. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:375-386 https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(95)90707-6
  8. Williams MYA, Mealey BL, Hallon WW. The role of computerized tom-ography in dental implantology. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992; 7:373-380
  9. Kohavi D, Bar-Ziv J, Marmary Y Effect of axial plane deviation on cross-sectional height in reformatted computed tomography of the mandible. Dentomaxillofac radiol 1997; 26: 189-191 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600242
  10. Choi SC, Choi HM, Park RJ, Lee SS, Park TW, You DS. Accuracy of CT image in measuring the mandible for implant : Effect of mandibular position and gantry angle. J Korean Acad Oral Maxillofac Radiol 1998;28:226-234
  11. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. 2nd Ed. Mosby, 1999 p.360-363
  12. Wise MD. Failure in the restored dentition : management and treatment. Quintessence 1995 p.514-517