Logo do repositório

Incidental Findings Following Dental Implant Procedures in the Mandible: A New Post-Processing CBCT Software Analysis

dc.contributor.authorGarrote, Marcel da Silva
dc.contributor.authorAlencar, Ana Helena Gonçalves de
dc.contributor.authorEstrela, Cyntia Rodrigues de Araújo
dc.contributor.authorEstrela, Lucas Rodrigues de Araújo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBueno, Mike Reis
dc.contributor.authorGuedes, Orlando Aguirre
dc.contributor.authorEstrela, Carlos
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)
dc.contributor.institutionEvangelical University of Goiás
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionDiagnostic Imaging Center
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-29T20:16:12Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-01
dc.description.abstractBackground/Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate incidental findings in the mandible after the placement of dental implants using a new cone–beam computed tomography (CBCT) software. Methods: The initial sample consisted of 2872 CBCT scans of patients of both sexes. The parameters evaluated in this study were the location of the implants in the mandible, implant length, anatomical relationship of the implant with the mandibular canal, presence or absence of damage to the adjacent teeth, presence or absence of implant fractures, and presence or absence of bone support. Fisher’s exact test was performed to compare the variables. The significance level was set at p = 0.05. Results: Out of 2872 CBCT scans, 214 images of patients with an average age of 44.5 years were included. The most frequent location of the implants was the posterior region (93.5%), with 54% of the implants having a length between 9 and 14 mm. It was found that 92% of the implants were positioned above the mandibular canal. Damage to adjacent teeth was observed, with no correlation with the implant positioning (p = 1.000). In 100% of cases of implants in the anterior region, there was bone support. Fracture was observed in 1.7% of implants with a length between 9 and 14 mm. Conclusions: The installation of implants in the mandible occurs more frequently in the posterior region, with a high presence of bone support and a low incidence of damage to adjacent teeth, anatomical structures, and fractures.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Endodontics School of Dentistry Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Oral Biology School of Dentistry Evangelical University of Goiás
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry School of Dentistry São Paulo State University
dc.description.affiliationCenter for Radiology and Orofacial Images Diagnostic Imaging Center
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry School of Dentistry São Paulo State University
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14171908
dc.identifier.citationDiagnostics, v. 14, n. 17, 2024.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/diagnostics14171908
dc.identifier.issn2075-4418
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85203616100
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11449/309645
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofDiagnostics
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectcone–beam computed tomography
dc.subjectdental implant
dc.subjectdiagnosis
dc.subjectincidental findings
dc.titleIncidental Findings Following Dental Implant Procedures in the Mandible: A New Post-Processing CBCT Software Analysisen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.author.orcid0009-0000-6580-5836[1]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-0382-5767[3]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-1664-329X[6]

Arquivos

Coleções