ArticleJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Comparative evaluation of ultrasonography with cone-beam computed tomography for peri-implant bone loss analysis - A cadaveric goat mandible study.
Article in Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early diagnosis of peri-implant bone loss is vital for the successful management of peri-implantitis. Among the various diagnostic tools available, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is the most commonly used method. However, CBCT has own limitations, which have led to the development of new diagnostic technologies. Of these, ultrasonography (US) appears to be the most promising. The aim of the current study was to compare and evaluate the efficacy of US with CBCT and direct measurement (DM) using a periodontal probe (PP) in assessing peri-implant bone defects created in a cadaveric goat mandible. Materials and Methods: Fifteen cadaveric goat mandibles were procured from a local slaughterhouse, and 15 endosseous implants (3.5 mm × 13 mm) were placed using a standard surgical protocol. Critical defects measuring 7 mm × 3 mm × 3 mm were created around the implants using a piezosurgical unit. These defects were evaluated using a PP for DM in Group I (GI), CBCT in Group II (GII), and ultrasonography (US) in Group III (GIII). The collected data were statistically analyzed. Results: The mean height of the peri-implant osseous defect measured in GI, GII, and GIII was 6.05 ± 0.08 mm, 5.55 ± 0.40 mm, and 6.05 ± 0.30 mm, respectively. The measurements in GIII were comparable to those of GI and more precise than those of GII. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the current study, US is more effective than CBCT and equally effective as DM using a PP in measuring critical peri-implant bone defects in cadaveric goat mandible. Therefore, ultrasonography can be considered a reliable diagnostic tool for routine implant follow-up.
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.