ArticleJADA foundational science2022
A comparative evaluation of the metallic artifact generated by a ceramic dental implant and a titanium dental implant imaged on cone-beam computed tomographic scans: An ex vivo study.
Article in JADA foundational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of auto-adaptive metal artifact reduction (aMAR) program in cone-beam computed tomography on assessing pre-implant bone levels.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2024Article
- Guided Bone Regeneration in the Posterior Mandible Using a Resorbable Metal Magnesium Membrane and Fixation Screws: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dental implants are becoming the treatment of choice for restoring edentulous sites. Dental implants are typically made of a titanium alloy, and this produces a metallic artifact that obscures adjacent anatomy when imaged using x-radiation, specifically on cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) scans. This artifact makes it challenging to evaluate peri-implant bone levels and any associated pathology. It was hypothesized that the introduction of ceramic implants would help in overcoming this challenge due to the nature and composition of the ceramic. The objective of this study was to compare the metallic artifact produced by ceramic and titanium dental implants when imaged with CBCT. Methods: Dental implants were placed in the edentulous sites of 2 dry human skulls, and CBCT scans with a standard 360° acquisition and a low-dose 180° acquisition were obtained. The metallic artifact generated by the implants was measured quantitatively using pixel intensity values and qualitatively using a modified Likert scale. Results: Average pixel intensity values, by gnathic region, ranged from 123.5 through 507 for titanium implants and 500 through 1,088.5 for ceramic implants. Qualitative analysis showed that ceramic implants produced more metallic artifact than titanium implants. Intraoperator and interoperator reliabilities assessed using Cronbach α showed consistency for both qualitative and quantitative analyses. Conclusion: Ceramic dental implants produced significantly more metallic artifact when imaged on CBCT scans than titanium implants.
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.