We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Quintessence International



Forgotten password?


Quintessence Int 47 (2016), No. 5     22. Apr. 2016
Quintessence Int 47 (2016), No. 5  (22.04.2016)

Page 441-446, doi:10.3290/j.qi.a35704, PubMed:26949765

A comparative study on the use of digital panoramic and periapical radiographs to assess proximal bone height around dental implants
Gutmacher, Zvi / Machtei, Eli E. / Hirsh, Ilan / Zigdon-Giladi, Hadar / Horwitz, Jacob
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare periapical radiographs (PA) and panoramic radiographs (PAN) in the measurement of proximal bone height around implants.
Method and Materials: Patients files that contained digital PAN and PA together with information on implant lengths and diameters were selected for this study. For each radiograph, the implant size served as reference for calibration. Proximal radiographic bone levels and the linear distance between the bone crest and implant shoulder were measured twice by one examiner. Paired t test was used to assess intra-examiner variability and differences between the two radiographic methods. Correlation was then assessed using Pearson correlation coefficient test. Significance level was determined at 5%.
Results: For the PAN measurements, the median mesial distances from bone crest to implant shoulder were 0.53 and 0.56 mm (first and second sets, P = .53). Likewise, for distal measurements these readings were 0.92 and 0.86 mm respectively (P = .66). For PA measurements, the corresponding measurements were 0.33 and 0.44 mm (P = .48) and 0.99 and 0.99 mm (P = .42), respectively. When PAN and PA measurements were compared, no statistically significant differences were detected between the two radiographic modalities. A very high positive correlation (r > 0.91) was attained for the PAN - PA measurements (P < .0001).
Conclusion: PAN are potentially as reliable and reproducible as PA for the assessment of proximal bone height around dental implants.

Keywords: accuracy, dental implants, imaging, panoramic, periapical, radiography