Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39543025›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2024

Visibility of alveolar bone thicknesses on CBCT images-a study on minimum bone requirements using various reconstruction techniques, viewing modes, and resolutions.

Camilla Lennholm, Hanna Andreasen, Anna Westerlund, Henrik Lund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Camilla LennholmDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, PO Box 450, Gothenburg, SE-405 30, Sweden. camilla.lennholm@gu.se.
Hanna AndreasenDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, PO Box 450, Gothenburg, SE-405 30, Sweden.
Anna WesterlundDepartment of Orthodontics, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Henrik LundDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, PO Box 450, Gothenburg, SE-405 30, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate at which thickness marginal bone becomes visible to the observer on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and how reconstruction technique and viewing mode affect assessment. MATERIALS AND

methodsFourteen anterior teeth from six human mandibles were examined with two CBCT resolution protocols: standard- and high-resolution. Distance from the cementoenamel junction to the visible marginal bone level (MBL) was measured in three groups of reconstructed CBCT images: multiplanar reformation (MPR) with grey scale, MPR with inverted grey scale, and 3D rendering. These measurements were used to identify the bone level where marginal bone width should be measured on histological photographs of sliced teeth. Gold standards comprised measurements of bone thickness at the superior MBL on histological photographs.

resultsMPR grey scale images exposed at high-resolution settings yielded highest validity: bone widths of 0.173 mm (buccal) and 0.356 mm (lingual) were necessary for visibility on a CBCT image. 3D-rendered lingual surfaces exposed with high-resolution settings had lowest validity. Intra-observer agreement for all CBCT and histological measurements was high.

conclusionThe best CBCT resolution protocol, reconstruction technique, and viewing mode for analyzing buccal and lingual surfaces of the alveolar bone margin are images exposed with a high-resolution protocol, reconstructed using MPR, and viewed in grey scale. Bone thickness required to be visualized was twice lingually compared to buccally. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The visualization of bone thickness in CBCT requires a greater thickness on the lingual side compared to the buccal side. 3D-rendered reconstructions should be avoided when evaluating thin bony structures.

Indexed as

Alveolar ProcessCone-Beam Computed TomographyImaging, Three-DimensionalMandibleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedIn Vitro TechniquesRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedCBCTCone-beam computed tomographyHistologyOrthodonticsPeriodontologyRadiology

Identifiers

PMID39543025
PMCPMC11564398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.