The role of implants and implant prostheses on the accuracy and artifacts of cone-beam computed tomography: an in-vitro study

Abstract

Abstract To assess the accuracy of CBCT in implant-supported prostheses and to evaluate metal artifacts with and without implants or implant prostheses. Accuracy and artifacts were assessed in the dried mandible at three points on the buccal and lingual cortical plates on the mandible's body near the crest and the base. On the buccal cortical plate, these points were labelled as A, B and C near the crest and D, E and F near the base of the body of the mandible. Similarly, points a to f were marked on the lingual cortical plate corresponding to points A to F. The study had two control groups, C0 for physical linear measurement (PLM) and C1 for radiographic linear measurement (RLM) and artifact assessment. There were seven test groups, TG 1 to 7, progressing from a single implant to implant full-arch prosthesis. For accuracy assessment, PLM was compared to RLM. CBCT artifacts were investigated in images integrated at 0.25 mm, 10 mm, and 20 mm at regions of interest on concentric circles at different intersecting angles by comparing grayscale values at C1 and TG1 to 7. The data were collected and statistically analyzed. A significant difference was observed between C0 and C1, and RLM in test groups at the superior axial plane. Similarly, PLM and test RLM in the sagittal plane at A-B, B-C, and D-E were statistically significant. A significant difference between PLM and RLM was also observed in the vertical plane at A-D, B-E, and C-F. Quantification of CBCT artifacts in the presence of implants or prostheses revealed that full-arch prostheses had the highest mean grayscale value, whereas single implants with a prosthesis had the lowest. The mean grayscale change was greatest around the implant and implant prosthesis. The mean grayscale value was maximum at 20 mm voxel integration scales (VIS) and lowest at 0.25 mm. CBCT is a clinically reliable device. Metal in implants or implant-supported prostheses prevents true assessment of the peri-implant area; therefore, lower VIS is suggested in the presence of implants or implant prostheses.