Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

Journal of Oral Science & Rehabilitation Issue 01/2015

3 -1.4 (0.6) -1.1 (0.5) 2 -1.2 (0.4) -1.2 (0.6) 1 -0.8 (0.5) -1.5 (0.6) 0 -0.5 (0.7) -1.3 (1.2) -1 -0.6 (0.9) -1.5 (0.8) -2 -0.9 (0.6) -1.1 (1.6) -3 -1.2 (1.0) -1.0 (1.6) 68 Volume 1 | Issue 1/2015 Journal of Oral Science & Rehabilitation standardized grid was used with squares of 1  mm in dimension and not a grid that was adapted in dimensions to those of the alveolar process. It has to be considered that the dis- tance betweenthetwo adjacentteeth is notthe same in different locations and in different sub- jects, sothe area covered bya standardized grid does not include the whole ROI. Moreover, the measures taken in each intersecting plane do not represent the same position in all patients. Consequently,thegridshouldbeadaptedtothe dimension of the space between the two adja- centteeth.The use of2-D analysis maybe com- parable if used in the middle of the ROI be cause it is a reference plane easily detected in all models. From a clinical perspective, the 3-D method may help clinicians to understand in a more ob- jective manner what happens to the alveolar process after tooth extraction and the immedi- ateplacementofanimplant.Differentiationbe- tween hard- and soft-tissue loss cannot be ex- pressed by the data from this 3-D method and requires a different approach, such as surgical re-entry or radiographic assessment. The 3-D analysis used in the present studywas found to be fast, accurate and noninvasive. Conclusion The 2-D method can be very useful for under- standing changes at a localized point. The 3-D method proposed is faster, more accurate at ex- pressingthevolumelossandcorrelatedtothedi- mensions of the analyzed region. The use of this methodisconsequentlyhighlyrecommended. Acknowledgments The competent contributions of engineers Gianpaolo Savio, Matteo Turchetto and Andrea Cerardi in the automation ofthe 2-D processes of measurement are highly appreciated. Special thanksgotoL.O.R.I.(NoventaPadovana,Italy)and Loripadova Tecnologia (Noventa Padovana) for supportinthe3-DprocessingandtotheAriminum Research and DentalEducation Center,Ariminum Odontologica,fordataanalysisandinterpretation. The implants and impression material were pro- videdbySweden&Martina(DueCarrare,Italy). Volum etric 3 -D d igita l analysi s Mean (S.D.) 69.7 (39.1) 74.3 (29.8) 144.1 (61.2) 1202.9 (524.4) 5.9 (1.9) 6.8 (2.2) 12.7 (3.1) Median 63.8* 75.5* 134.3* 1288.5 6.4* 6.7* 12.9* (25th ; 75th percentiles) (34.4; 105.4) (49.6; 88.8) (106.0; 174.5) (895.3; 1557.8) (5.4; 7.1) (5.6; 8.3) (11.8; 13.4) Mean (S.D.) 1.98 (1.74) 3.31 (4.04) 5.29 (5.24) 1202.9 (524.4) 0.18 (0.13) 0.39 (0.42) 0.57 (0.50) Median 1.73* 2.67* 4.02* 1288.5 0.19* 0.20* 0.45* (25th ; 75th percentiles) (0.60; 3.31) (0.17; 3.61) (2.23; 7.11) (895.3; 1557.8) (0.11; 0.26) (0.02; 0.77) (0.18; 0.98) Vertical plane Buccal aspect Lingual/palatal aspect Table 4 Table 5 * A p-value of < 0.05 between the test and control sites. Table 4 2-D analysis. Mean values and standard deviations of the vertical reduction of the buccal and lingual/palatal aspects of the alveolar process at the most coronal of the seven intersection points in mm. Table 5 3-D analysis. Mean values, standard deviations (S.D.), medians, and 25th and 75th percentiles of the volume reduction of the alveolar process in absolute values in mm3 and in % at the test and control sites. Δ V-b mm3 Δ V-l mm3 Δ V-tot mm3 V-ROI mm3 Δ V-b% Δ V-l% Δ V-tot% Test implant site Contralateral control site 1288.56.4* 1288.50.19*

Pages Overview