Alternative approach for the registration of peri-implant bone level changes at the remote rehabilitation period.

Authors

  • V. Rusyn Uzhhorod National University, Ukraine
  • M. Goncharuk-Khomyn Uzhhorod National University, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26641/1997-9665.2016.2.77-84

Keywords:

peri-implant bone level, bone reduction

Abstract

Background. Adaptive changes of residual peri-implant bone level occurring as the result of bone remodeling processes require clear objectification and categorization for the development of new methodological approach for evaluation the quality of dental implantation. Objective. To propose an alternative approach for the registration of peri-implant bone level changes with the use of specific geometric data analysis on the cone-beam computed tomography results; to evaluate the perspectives and possible disadvantages of proposed approach in terms of sensitivity and accuracy indicators due to features of tomographic verification methods as diagnostic tools in modern implant practice. Methods. DICOM-files of dental patients who have undergone the procedure of dental implantation were used as objects of approbation study. OnDemand3D ™ (Cybermed Inc.) software was used for the conversion of existing DICOM-files to the triangulation file formats (STL-files). Open source software MeshLab 1.3.3. was used to simplify the phase of geometric graphic analysis of the STL-files. The adapted geometric analysis protocol was used for the registration of peri-implant bone level at different time periods. The interpretation of the data obtained during the processing of STL-files was done with the calibration of dimensional scalar values regarding the actual size parameters of dental implant. Processing and analysis of numerical data was conducted using the Microsoft Excel 2016 (Microsoft Office 2016, Microsoft). Results. The proposed alternative method for detecting the level of peri-implant bone reduction takes into account the shortcomings of analogical radiological research methods, and provides the possibility for registration dynamic changes that are volume or circular by nature. In addition, the specificity of adapted geometrical analysis based on the evaluation of primary and recurrent tomographic results with the preservation of deflection options, spatial coordinates and number of tangential rays. Such approach helps accurately verify the marginal bone resorption in a particular area of interest, or display a mean value of bone reduction by mathematical calculations, minimizing the factor of subjective interpretation and impact of errors inherent to planar imaging reformats. The proposed approach is appropriate for using at 1 year of longer remote period, when the level bone resorption is close to 1 mm. Conclusion. Objectivisation of numerical parameters for bone level changes around the titanium endo-osseus elements can help not only to predict the progression of bone resorption in future, but also to develop specific criteria for assessing the quality of implant intervention based on specific terms of quantitative bone reduction in a remote time period.

References

  1. Willie B, Duda GN, Weinkamer R. Bone Structural Adaptation and Wolff’s Law. Materials Design Inspired by Nature: Function Through Inner Architecture. 2013;1(1):17-45.
  2. Oppenheimer AJ, Tong L, Buchman SR. Craniofacial Bone Grafting: Wolff's Law Revisited. Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction. 2008;1(1):49-61. DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1098963
  3. Ozcivici E, Luu YK, Adler B, Qin YX, Rubin J, Judex S, Rubin CT. Mechanical signals as anabolic agents in bone. Nature Reviews Rheumatology. 2010;6(1):50-59. DOI:10.1038/nrrheum.2009.239
  4. Ritter L, Elger MC, Rothamel D, Fienitz T, Zinser M, Schwarz F, Zöller JE. Accuracy of periimplant bone evaluation using cone beam CT, digital intraoral radiographs and histology. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2014;43(6):20130088. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20130088
  5. Pearson OM, Lieberman DE. The aging of Wolff's “law”: ontogeny and responses to mechanical loading in cortical bone. American journal of physical anthropology. 2004;125(S39):63-99. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.20155
  6. Vera C, De Kok IJ, Chen W, Reside G, Tyn-dall D, Cooper LF. Evaluation of post-implant buccal bone resorption using cone beam computed tomography: a clinical pilot study. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2011;27(5):1249-1257.
  7. Frost HM. A 2003 update of bone physiology and Wolff's Law for clinicians. The Angle Orthodontist. 2004;74(1):3-15.
  8. Frost HM. From Wolff's law to the Utah paradigm: insights about bone physiology and its clinical applications. The Anatomical Record. 2001;262(4):398-419. DOI: 10.1002/ar.1049
  9. Jee WS. Principles in bone physiology. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2000;1(1):11-13.
  10. Jee WS, Tian XY. The benefit of combining non-mechanical agents with mechanical loading: a perspective based on the Utah Paradigm of Skeletal Physiology. Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions. 2005;5(2):110-118.
  11. Chen J, Ahmad R, Suenaga H, Li W, Swain M, Li Q. A comparative study on complete and implant retained denture treatments–a biomechanics perspective. Journal of biomechanics. 2015;48(3):512-519.
  12. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.11.043
  13. Chen J, Rungsiyakull C, Li W, Chen Y, Swain M, Li Q. Multiscale design of surface morphological gradient for osseointegration. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials. 2013;20:387-397. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.08.019
  14. Weinans H, Sumner DR, Igloria R, Natarajan RN. Sensitivity of periprosthetic stress-shielding to load and the bone density–modulus relationship in subject-specific finite element models. Journal of biomechanics. 200;33(7):809-817. DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00036-1
  15. Li J, Li H, Shi L, Fok AS, Ucer C, Devlin H, Silikas N. A mathematical model for simulating the bone remodeling process under mechanical stimulus. Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials. 2007;23(9):1073-1078. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.10.004
  16. Huynh‐Ba G, Pjetursson BE, Sanz M, Cecchinato D, Ferrus J, Lindhe J, Lang NP. Analysis of the socket bone wall dimensions in the upper maxilla in relation to immediate implant placement. Clinical oral implants research. 2010;21(1):37-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01870.x
  17. Romeo E, Lops D, Amorfini L, Chiapasco M, Ghisolfi M, Vogel G. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small‐diameter (3.3‐mm) implants followed for 1–7 years: a longitudinal study. Clinical oral implants research. 2006;17(2):139-148. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01191.x
  18. Cignoni P, Callieri M, Corsini M, Dellepiane M, Ganovelli F, Ranzuglia G. Meshlab: an open-source mesh processing tool. In Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference. 2008;1(1):129-136.
  19. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Schwartz-Arad D. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) pisa consensus conference. Implant dentistry. 2008;17(1):5-15. DOI:10.1097/ID.0b013e3181676059
  20. Crespi R, Capparè P, Gherlone E. Radio-graphic evaluation of marginal bone levels around platform-switched and non-platform-switched implants used in an immediate loading protocol. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2008;24(5):920-926.
  21. Jemt T, Sundén Pikner S, Gröndahl K. Changes of Marginal Bone Level in Patients with “Progressive Bone Loss” at Brånemark System® Implants: A Radiographic Follow‐Up Study over an Average of 9 Years. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2015;17(4):619-628. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12166
  22. Francetti L, Romeo D, Corbella S, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M. Bone Level Changes Around Axial and Tilted Implants in Full‐Arch Fixed Immediate Restorations. Interim Results of a Prospective Study. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2012;14(5):646-654. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00304.x
  23. Clementini M, Rossetti PHO, Penarrocha D, Micarelli C, Bonachela WC, Canullo L. Systemic risk factors for peri-implant bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2014;43(3):323-334. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2013.11.012
  24. Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, Schneider D, Schupbach P, Hürzeler M. The Socket‐Shield Tech-nique: First Histological, Clinical, and Volumetrical Observations after Separation of the Buccal Tooth Segment–A Pilot Study. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2015;17(1):71-82. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12076
  25. Bittar-Cortez JA, Passeri LA, de Almeida SM, Haiter-Neto F. Comparison of peri-implant bone level assessment in digitized conventional ra-diographs and digital subtraction images. Dento maxillo facial radiology. 2006;35(4):258-262. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/84778143
  26. Schropp L, Stavropoulos A, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Comparison of panoramic and conven-tional cross‐sectional tomography for preoperative selection of implant size. Clinical oral implants re-search. 2011;22(4); 424-429. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02006.x
  27. Sirin Y, Horasan S, Yaman D, Basegmez C, Tanyel C, Aral A, & Guven K. Detection of crestal radiolucencies around dental implants: an in vitro experimental study. Journal of Oral and Maxillofa-cial Surgery. 2012;70(7):1540-1550. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2012.02.024
  28. Yepes JF, Al-Sabbagh M. Use of conebeam computed tomography in early detection of implant failure. Dental Clinics of North America. 2015:59(1):41-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2014.09.003
  29. Fienitz T, Schwarz F, Ritter L, Dreiseidler T, Becker J, Rothamel D. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in assessing peri‐implant bone defect regeneration: a histologically controlled study in dogs. Clinical oral implants research. 2012;23(7):882-887. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02232.x
  30. Dave M, Davies J, Wilson R, Palmer R. A comparison of cone beam computed tomography and conventional periapical radiography at detecting peri‐implant bone defects. Clinical oral implants research. 2013;24(6):671-678. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02473.x
  31. Kühl S, Zürcher S, Zitzmann NU, Filippi A, Payer M, Dagassan-Berndt D. Detection of peri-implant bone defects with different radiographic techniques-a human cadaver study. Clinical oral implants research. 2015; Online Version of Record published before inclusion in an issue. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12619
  32. Vasconcelos TV, Neves FS, Moraes LA, Freitas DQ. Vertical bone measurements from cone beam computed tomography images using different software packages. Brazilian oral research. 2014;29(1):1-6. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0035

Downloads

How to Cite

Rusyn, V., & Goncharuk-Khomyn, M. (2016). Alternative approach for the registration of peri-implant bone level changes at the remote rehabilitation period. Морфологія / Morphologia / Morfologìâ, 10(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.26641/1997-9665.2016.2.77-84

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2016)

Section

Статті

License

Copyright (c) 2018 Morphologia

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 The authors reserve the right to authorship of their work and transfer to the Journal the right to the first publication of this work under the terms of a license Creative commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), which allows other people to freely distribute the published work with a mandatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
        By submitting a manuscript to the editorial office of the Journal ‘Morphologia’ authors agree to transfer the rights to protect and use the manuscript (all supplemental materials, particularly protected objects such as photos, drawings, diagrams, tables, etc.), including the reproduction in the press and distribution via the Internet; translation of the manuscript into any language; export and import of journal copies with the Authors’ article in order to make it available for public. Authors convey the rights mentioned above to the editorial office without any temporal or territorial limitation all over the world. 
        The Authors guarantee that they have the exclusive rights to use the material transferred to editorial office. Editors are not responsible to third parties for contraventions of warranty given by the Authors. The considered rights are transferred to the editorial office since the moment when the current issue is signed for publishing. Reproduction of materials published in the Journal by other individuals and legal entities is possible only with the consent of Editorial office, with the obligatory indication of the full bibliographic reference of the primary publication. The Authors reserve the right to use the published material, its fragments and parts for teaching materials, oral presentations, dissertation thesis prepararion with obligatory bibliographic citation of the original paper. Electron copy of the published article, downloaded from official journal web-site in .pdf format may be put by authors on the official web-site of their institutions, any other official resources with open access.