Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Quantitative measurement of peri-implant bone defects using optical coherence tomography

  • Kim, Sulhee (Department of Periodontology, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Kang, Se-Ryong (Department of Biomedical Radiation Sciences, Seoul National University Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology) ;
  • Park, Hee-Jung (Department of Dental Hygiene, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kim, Bome (Department of Periodontology, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Kim, Tae-Il (Department of Periodontology, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Yi, Won-Jin (Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry)
  • Received : 2018.03.18
  • Accepted : 2018.04.21
  • Published : 2018.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to visualize and identify peri-implant bone defects in optical coherence tomography (OCT) images and to obtain quantitative measurements of the defect depth. Methods: Dehiscence defects were intentionally formed in porcine mandibles and implants were simultaneously placed without flap elevation. Only the threads of the fixture could be seen at the bone defect site in the OCT images, so the depth of the peri-implant bone defect could be measured through the length of the visible threads. To analyze the reliability of the OCT measurements, the flaps were elevated and the depth of the dehiscence defects was measured with a digital caliper. Results: The average defect depth measured by a digital caliper was $4.88{\pm}1.28mm$, and the corresponding OCT measurement was $5.11{\pm}1.33mm$. Very thin bone areas that were sufficiently transparent in the coronal portion were penetrated by the optical beam in OCT imaging and regarded as bone loss. The intraclass correlation coefficient between the 2 methods was high, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) close to 1. In the Bland-Altman analysis, most measured values were within the threshold of the 95% CI, suggesting close agreement of the OCT measurements with the caliper measurements. Conclusions: OCT images can be used to visualize the peri-implant bone level and to identify bone defects. The potential of quantitative non-invasive measurements of the amount of bone loss was also confirmed.

Keywords

References

  1. De Bruyn H, Vandeweghe S, Ruyffelaert C, Cosyn J, Sennerby L. Radiographic evaluation of modern oral implants with emphasis on crestal bone level and relevance to peri-implant health. Periodontol 2000 2013;62:256-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12004
  2. Christiaens V, De Bruyn H, Thevissen E, Koole S, Dierens M, Cosyn J. Assessment of periodontal bone level revisited: a controlled study on the diagnostic accuracy of clinical evaluation methods and intra-oral radiography. Clin Oral Investig 2018;22:425-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2129-8
  3. Christiaens V, Jacobs R, Dierens M, Vervaeke S, De Bruyn H, Koole S, et al. Intraoral radiography lacks accuracy for the assessment of peri-implant bone level - a controlled clinical study. Eur J Oral Implantology 2017;10:435-41.
  4. Garcia-Garcia M, Mir-Mari J, Benic GI, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellon E. Accuracy of periapical radiography in assessing bone level in implants affected by peri-implantitis: a cross-sectional study. J Clin Periodontol 2016;43:85-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12491
  5. Bohner LOL, Mukai E, Oderich E, Porporatti AL, Pacheco-Pereira C, Tortamano P, et al. Comparative analysis of imaging techniques for diagnostic accuracy of peri-implant bone defects: a meta-analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017;124:432-40.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2017.06.119
  6. Agrawal P, Sanikop S, Patil S. New developments in tools for periodontal diagnosis. Int Dent J 2012;62:57-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1875-595X.2011.00099.x
  7. Mota CC, Fernandes LO, Cimoes R, Gomes AS. Non-invasive periodontal probing through fourierdomain optical coherence tomography. J Periodontol 2015;86:1087-94. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.150047
  8. Colston BW Jr, Everett MJ, Da Silva LB, Otis LL, Stroeve P, Nathel H. Imaging of hard- and soft-tissue structure in the oral cavity by optical coherence tomography. Appl Opt 1998;37:3582-5. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.37.003582
  9. Fernandes LO, Mota CC, de Melo LS, da Costa Soares MU, da Silva Feitosa D, Gomes AS. In vivo assessment of periodontal structures and measurement of gingival sulcus with Optical Coherence Tomography: a pilot study. J Biophotonics 2017;10:862-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201600082
  10. Hsieh YS, Ho YC, Lee SY, Lu CW, Jiang CP, Chuang CC, et al. Subgingival calculus imaging based on swept-source optical coherence tomography. J Biomed Opt 2011;16:071409. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.3602851
  11. Park JY, Chung JH, Lee JS, Kim HJ, Choi SH, Jung UW. Comparisons of the diagnostic accuracies of optical coherence tomography, micro-computed tomography, and histology in periodontal disease: an ex vivo study. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2017;47:30-40. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.1.30
  12. Kim SH, Kang SR, Park HJ, Kim JM, Yi WJ, Kim TI. Improved accuracy in periodontal pocket depth measurement using optical coherence tomography. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2017;47:13-9. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.1.13
  13. Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 1983;32:307-17. https://doi.org/10.2307/2987937
  14. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  15. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  16. Lindhe J, Berglundh T, Ericsson I, Liljenberg B, Marinello C. Experimental breakdown of peri-implant and periodontal tissues. A study in the beagle dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:9-16. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030102.x
  17. Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Lang NP. Comparative biology of chronic and aggressive periodontitis vs. periimplantitis. Periodontol 2000 2010;53:167-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2010.00348.x
  18. Serino G, Turri A, Lang NP. Probing at implants with peri-implantitis and its relation to clinical periimplant bone loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:91-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02470.x
  19. Ringeling J, Parvini P, Weinbach C, Nentwig GH, Nickles K, Eickholz P. Discomfort/pain due to pocket probing at teeth and endosseous implants: a cross-sectional study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:1005-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12669
  20. Benn DK. A review of the reliability of radiographic measurements in estimating alveolar bone changes. J Clin Periodontol 1990;17:14-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1990.tb01041.x
  21. Coli P, Christiaens V, Sennerby L, Bruyn H. Reliability of periodontal diagnostic tools for monitoring periimplant health and disease. Periodontol 2000 2017;73:203-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12162
  22. Tomasi C, Derks J. Clinical research of peri-implant diseases--quality of reporting, case definitions and methods to study incidence, prevalence and risk factors of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodontol 2012;39 Suppl 12:207-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01831.x

Cited by

  1. Dimensional change of impression materials for dental prothesis using different measuring methods vol.26, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1590/s1517-707620210002.1257
  2. Interleukin-16 rs4072111 Polymorphism is Associated with the Risk of Peri-Implantitis in the Chinese Population vol.14, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2147/pgpm.s336857
  3. Potential Imaging Capability of Optical Coherence Tomography as Dental Optical Probe: A Mini-Review vol.11, pp.22, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app112211025