Diagnostic accuracy of 4 intraoral radiographic techniques for misfit detection at the implant abutment joint

Publication date: Available online 15 November 2017
Source:The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Author(s): Pollyana Darós, Vinícius Cavalcanti Carneiro, Amanda Pasolini Siqueira, Sergio Lins de-Azevedo-Vaz
Statement of problemA misfit or gap at the implant–abutment joint (IAJ) requires detection as it may compromise the health of the peri-implant tissue. However, which radiographic technique provides the most orthogonal relationship between the central beam and the implant/image receptor is unclear.PurposeThe purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 4 intraoral radiographic techniques on misfit detection at the IAJ.Material and methodsTwenty implants were placed in polyamide jaws, and customized dental implant abutments with a metal collar were installed. Different gaps were simulated by placing one or three 50-μm-thick polyester strips at the IAJ; the absence of the strip represented the control group (no gap). The 4 radiographic techniques were evaluated by using different film holders: a periapical with bisecting angle (PBA), a bitewing interproximal (BI), a periapical with standard paralleling (PSP), and a periapical with modified paralleling (PMP) holder (with a custom-made paralleling index). A total of 240 digital radiographs were evaluated by 4 clinicians experienced with dental implants. Differences were evaluated by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (Az) and Fisher tests (α=.05). Diagnostic values (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values) were also obtained. The Kappa test was used to assess intra- and interevaluator reproducibility, which ranged from moderate to almost perfect.ResultsAll diagnostic values, except specificity, were lower for the PBA technique for both the 50- and 150-μm gaps. Az values for the PBA technique were significantly lower than those obtained for the other 3 techniques (P<.05), which did not differ from each other. The 150-μm gaps were more easily detected than the 50-μm gaps only for PBA (P<.05).ConclusionsThe BI, PSP, and PMP techniques detected misfits at the IAJ most accurately. The PBA technique is not recommended for this purpose.



from ! ORL Sfakianakis via paythelady.61 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2hwPEXJ
via IFTTT