Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 18, Issue 12, pp 2975–2980 | Cite as

High-resolution CT of transplanted teeth: imaging technique and measurement accuracy

  • André Gahleitner
  • Ulrike Kuchler
  • Peter Homolka
  • Janina Heschl
  • Georg Watzek
  • Herwig Imhof
Head and Neck

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of crown diameter measurements by dental CT as a tool for preoperative diagnosis before tooth transplantations. Fifty-eight patients underwent clinically indicated dental CT. The diameter of the crowns were measured by CT using a standard protocol (1.5-mm slice thickness, 1-mm table feed, 120 kV, 25–75 mA/s, 2-s scan time/slice, 512 matrix) and a standard dental software package. Postoperatively, the same distances were clinically measured using a sliding gauge. The degree of the deviation between CT measurements and clinical measurements was in the sub-millimeter range. According to the regression analysis, the correlation coefficient equals 0.98 and 0.97, indicating a strong relationship between the CT and the manual measurement of the crown diameter in the bucco-lingual and the mesio-distal direction. The mean deviation of CT measurements with regard to the bucco-lingual diameter of the crown was +0.08 mm (SD: ±0.38 mm). For the mesio-distal diameter, the mean deviation of CT measurements was −0.24 mm (SD: ±0.53 mm). These results demonstrate that dental CT promises to be a valuable tool for the evaluation of the potential and optimal size and site for tooth transplantations.

Keywords

Computed tomography Measurement Tooth Transplantation 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We thank R. Gruber for the statistical analysis.

References

  1. 1.
    Andreasen JO (1993) Farbatlas der Replantation und Transplantation von Zähnen. Deutscher Ärzte-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eskici A (1980) Replantation and transplantation of teeth and tooth germs. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 35:343–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lang B, Pohl Y, Filippi A (2003) Tooth transplantation. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 113(11):1178–1199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abrahams JJ (2001) Dental CT imaging: a look at the jaw. Radiology 219(2):334–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tronje G, Welander U, McDavid WD, Morris CR (1981) Image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. I. General considerations. Acta Radiol Diagn 22:295Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tronje G, Eliasson S, Julin P, Welander U (1981) Image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. II. Vertical distances. Acta radiol Diagn 22:449Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tronje G, Welander U, McDavid WD, Morris CR (1981) Image distortion in rotational panoramic radiography. III. Inclined objects. Acta radiol Diagn 22:585–592Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goaz PW, White SC (1994) Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. Verlag MosbyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sewerin I (1987) Radiology in the management of impacted teeth. Int Dent J 37:25–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schwarz MS, Rothman SLG, Rhodes Ml, Chaftez N (1987) Computed tomography: Part 1. Pre-operative assessment of the mandible for endosseos implant surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2:137–141PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schwarz MS, Rothman SLG, Rhodes Ml, Chaftez N (1987) Computed tomography: Part 2. Pre-operative assessment of the mandible for endosseos implant surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2:143–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Solar P, Bednar A, Posch M, Gahleitner A, Jacobs K, Watzek G (2000) In-vitro-Genauigkeit von Dental-CT (SIM/Plant®) zur Vermessung des prospektiven Implantatlagers in der Mandibula. Stomatologie 97(8):211–217Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B (1995) Measurements of distances related to the mandibular canal in radiographs. Clin Oral Implants Res 6:96–103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mckee IW, Williamon PC, Lam EW, Heo G, Glover KE, Major PW (2001) Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 121(2):166–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Solar P, Gahleitner A (1999) Dental CT in the planning of surgical procedures. Its significance in the oro-maxillofacial region from the viewpoint of the dentist. Radiologe 39:1051–1063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fuhrmann R, Wehrbein H, Dietrich P (1993) Dreidimensionale computertomographische Darstellung des bezahnten Alveolarkammes. Ein radiologisch histologischer Vergleich. Fortschr Kieferorthop 54:91–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haßfeld S, Streib S, Sahl H, Stratmann U, Fehrentz D, Zöller J (1998) Low-dose computerized tomography of the jaw bone in pre-implantation diagnosis. Limits of dose reduction and accuracy of distance measurements. Mund- Kiefer- Gesichtschir 2:188–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rustemeyer P, Streubuhr U, Hohn HP, Rustemeyer R, Eich HT, John-Mikolajewski V, Muller RD (1999) Low-dosage dental CT. RoFo 171:130–135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J (2008) Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 37(1):10–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stratemann S, Huang J, Maki K, Miller A, Hatcher D (2008) Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol 37(2):80–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • André Gahleitner
    • 1
    • 4
  • Ulrike Kuchler
    • 2
  • Peter Homolka
    • 3
  • Janina Heschl
    • 2
  • Georg Watzek
    • 2
  • Herwig Imhof
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology/Osteology and MRMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.Department of Oral SurgeryMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.Center for Biomedical Engineering and PhysicsMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyMedical University ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations