Abstract
Objective This study was developed to evaluate the influence of voxel size on bone measurements for implant planning. Materials and Methods The research was performed by using edentulous synthetic human mandibles with different levels of bone resorption. For each mandible, height and bone thickness were measured with a digital caliper. The PaX-i3d device was used to acquire the volumes of the five mandibles, with 50kVp, 4 mA, and a voxel size of 0.08 mm. After the acquisition, the images were reconstructed in the software CS three-dimensional Imaging, with four different sizes of voxels: 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 mm. All volumes were analyzed by a single evaluator who performed measurements to obtain bone height and thickness, using the reference points that were considered in obtaining the gold standard. The data were analyzed by ANOVA with a significance level of 5%. Results There was no significant difference in the measurements obtained with different voxel sizes, both for bone height measurements and bone thickness. There was no statistically significant difference in measurements in thickness in comparison to the gold standard. Conclusion When necessary, to measure height and bone thickness, it is possible to recommend voxel images of larger size (0.40 mm) without compromising the quality of the patient's clinical planning.
Highlights
In any area of dentistry, the correct planning of the case is fundamental for the satisfactory result, and in implantology, it is not different
Imaging exams are complementary in the diagnostic process, and they are an essential resource for treatment planning
An imaging technique that allows the evaluation of bone quality, height, and thickness is sought as the ideal, in addition to enabling the analysis of the relationship of implant sites with vital anatomical structures.[1]
Summary
In any area of dentistry, the correct planning of the case is fundamental for the satisfactory result, and in implantology, it is not different. Imaging exams are complementary in the diagnostic process, and they are an essential resource for treatment planning. An imaging technique that allows the evaluation of bone quality, height, and thickness is sought as the ideal, in addition to enabling the analysis of the relationship of implant sites with vital anatomical structures.[1]. Complementary exams are essential to avoid transoperative and postoperative complications, such as hemorrhage due to artery injury, paresthesia due to nerve tissue damage, poor positioning of the implant, and compromising its stability among others.[2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
