Evaluation of mini-implant sites in the posterior maxilla using traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography.

Abstract

Objectives:To evaluate the accuracy of using routine 2-dimensional (2D) radiographs (panoramic and periapical) when evaluating the position of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (mini-implants) in the maxilla, and to compare the results to 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).Methods:This cross-sectional study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from February 2014 to January 2015. Panoramic and periapical radiographs were used to examine the position of mini-implants in relation to the adjacent roots. Rating of mini-implants position was performed by 82 dentists from different specialties, using 2 D images according to the following criteria: 1) away from the root; 2) mini-implant tip appears touching the lamina dura; and 3) mini-implant overlays the lamina dura. The results were compared with CBCT findings.Results:There was no difference between dentists from different specialties when rating the position of the mini-implants (Cronbach’s alpha=0.956). The accuracy of the periapical images was 45.1%, while the panoramic images 33.6%. However, both panoramic and periapical radiographs were significantly inaccurate when assessing the mini-implant position when compared with the CBCT findings (p=0.0001).Conclusion:Three-dimensional CBCT technology allows better visualization of mini-implant placement. The use of CBCT when assessing the position of mini-implants is recommended.