title: Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in assessing peri-implant bone defect regeneration: a histologically controlled study in dogs.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in terms of buccal bone-wall configuration and peri-implant bone defect regeneration after guided bone regeneration (GBR).
  
  
  METHODS
  Titanium implants were inserted into standardized box-shaped defects in the mandible of 12 foxhounds. Defects of one side were augmented following the principle of GBR, while the other side was left untreated. Radiological evaluation was performed using CBCT and compared with histomorphometrical measurements of the respective site serving as a validation method.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Non-augmented control sites providing a horizontal bone width (BW) of<0.5 mm revealed a significantly lower accuracy between the radiological and the histological evaluation of the buccal defect depth (1.93 ± 1.59 mm) compared with the group providing a BW of >0.5 mm (0.7 ± 0.7 mm) (P<0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). In GBR-treated defects, the subgroup <0.5 mm (1.49 ± 1.29 mm) revealed a significantly higher difference between CBCT and histology compared with >0.5 mm (0.82 ± 1.07) (P>0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). However, a radiological discrimination between original bone, integrated and non-integrated bone substitute material was not reliable. Additionally, it was found that a minimum buccal BW of 0.5 mm was necessary for the detection of bone in radiology.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The evaluation of peri-implant bone defect regeneration by means of CBCT is not accurate for sites providing a BW of <0.5 mm. Moreover, a safe assessment of the success of the GBR technique is not possible after the application of a radiopaque bone substitute material.
authors.affiliation: Department of Oral Surgery, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
authors.forename: Tim
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Fienitz
authors.forename: Frank
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Schwarz
authors.forename: Lutz
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Ritter
authors.forename: Timo
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Dreiseidler
authors.forename: Juergen
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Becker
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Rothamel
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001672:Biocompatible Materials / Q000494:pharmacology; D001861:Bone Regeneration / Q000502:physiology*; D018786:Bone Substitutes / Q000494:pharmacology; D054893:Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000379:methods*; D015921:Dental Implants; D004285:Dogs; D016557:Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal / Q000379:methods*; D020007:Implants, Experimental; D008334:Mandible / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000601:surgery*; D057873:Peri-Implantitis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D014025:Titanium; D014945:Wound Healing / Q000502:physiology
chemical_list: D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D018786:Bone Substitutes; D015921:Dental Implants; D014025:Titanium