ArticleBMC medical imaging2022
Comparison of the amount of artifacts induced by zirconium and titanium implants in cone-beam computed tomography images.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are the detection and dimensions of peri-implant buccal bone defects influenced by different implant materials and their location? An experimental cone-beam computed tomography study.Journal of periodontology · 2026Article
- Challenges in Radiotherapy for Mandibular Cancer With Titanium Implant Reconstruction: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Assessment of Radiation Attenuation Properties in Dental Implants Using Monte Carlo Method.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the effect of reducing metal artifacts in multi-detector CT imaging of zirconia and titanium implants.Oral radiology · 2025Article
- Combination of metal artifact reduction and sharpening filter application for horizontal root fracture diagnosis in teeth adjacent to a zirconia implant.Imaging science in dentistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the amount of artifacts induced by the titanium and zirconium implants on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and assess the effect of different exposure settings on the image quality for both materials.
methodsIn this experimental study, 30 zirconium and 30 titanium implants were placed in bovine rib bone blocks. CBCT images were taken in two different fields of view (FOV: 4 × 6 cm
resultsThe results showed that titanium implants caused lower amounts of artifacts than zirconium implants, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The larger FOV (6 × 8 cm
conclusionOur results suggest that zirconium implants induce higher amounts of artifacts than titanium ones. We also concluded that the artifacts could be minimized using the larger FOV and voxel size.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.