Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Implant Dentistry: Back to the Future

Abstract

I am writing in response to the recent article, “Is Cone Beam Computed Tomography Always Necessary for Dental Implant Placement?”, 1 Deeb G, Antonos L, Tack S, et al: Is cone beam computed tomography always necessary for dental implant placement? [published online ahead of print November 15, 2016]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.11.014. Google Scholar published in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Is Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Always Necessary for Dental Implant Placement?Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryVol. 75Issue 2PreviewThe use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for evaluation of patients for dental implants has gained considerable popularity. This retrospective cohort study was designed to determine whether using a clinical examination and a panoramic radiograph (Panorex) for implant selection and determining the need for bone grafting would be comparable to using CBCT in routine implant cases. Full-Text PDF In ReplyJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryVol. 75Issue 4PreviewWe agree, as you note in your letter and as our study confirms, that cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is more accurate than panoramic radiography. However, does that mean that it should be used in all implant cases? As you indicate, and we emphasize in our article, there is the question of increased radiation exposure, lack of access, and cost. Therefore, we undertook our study to compare the treatment planning accuracy of the 2 methods. Our findings indicated that the use of a panoramic radiograph and a clinical examination are adequate for routine implant planning and that CBCT should be used for cases in which there is close proximity of vital structures, possible need for adjunctive bone grafting, or planned guided surgery. Full-Text PDF