Advertisement

The dimensions of the facial alveolar bone at tooth sites with local pathologies: a retrospective cone-beam CT analysis

  • Ausra RamanauskaiteEmail author
  • K. Becker
  • H. C. Kassira
  • J. Becker
  • R. Sader
  • F. Schwarz
Original Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

To assess the impact of various local pathologies on facial alveolar bone dimensions at tooth sites.

Materials and methods

Cone-beam computed tomography images of 60 patients were analyzed. Healthy teeth and teeth with local pathologies (i.e., endodontically treated, periodontally diseased teeth, and teeth with periapical lesions) were included. The thickness of the facial alveolar bone was measured at five locations: (1) the bone crest (W0), (2) 25% (W25), (3) 50% (W50), (4) 75% (W75) of the distance from the bone crest to the root apex (A), and (5) in the A region (W100). The results were considered statistically significant at p < 0.0008 (adjustment according to the statistical correction for multiple testing).

Results

A total of 1174 teeth (707 healthy and 467 with the local pathologies) were assessed. Periodontally diseased maxillary premolars and anterior teeth in the mandible in the W0 position, as well as maxillary molars in the W25 position, tended to have a lower facial bone thickness when compared to the healthy teeth (0.68 mm vs. 0.84 mm, p = 0.008; 0.47 mm vs. 0.55 mm, p = 0.004; and 1.27 mm vs. 1.72 mm; p = 0.009, respectively). In contrast, the observed tendency pointed towards thicker facial bone wall for the periodontally diseased mandibular anterior teeth in the W50 position (0.74 vs. 0.52, p = 0.001). Healthy maxillary molars tended to display a thicker facial alveolar bone compared to the teeth with local pathologies in the W25, W50, and W75 positions (p = 0.001, p = 0.005, and p = 0.004, respectively).

Conclusions

The present analysis has indicated that local pathologies are commonly associated with a compromised socket morphology.

Clinical relevance

The facial bone thickness was particularly reduced at periodontally diseased teeth, which may challenge implant therapy.

Keywords

Retrospective analysis Bone thickness Cone-beam computed tomography 3D analysis 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by the authors’ own departments.

Compliance with ethical standards

The study protocol was in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013 and was approved by the local ethics committee (Study Nr. 4301).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

The article does not contain any studies with human participants.

Informed consent

For the systematic review, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Hammerle CH, Araujo MG, Simion M (2012) Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(Suppl 5):80–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tan WL, Wong TL, Wong MC, Lang NP (2012) A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 23 Suppl 5:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Araujo MG, Silva CO, Misawa M, Sukekava F (2015) Alveolar socket healing: what can we learn? Periodontol 68(1):122–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J (2004) Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol 31(10):820–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Araujo MG, da Silva JCC, de Mendonça AF, Lindhe J (2015) Ridge alterations following grafting of fresh extraction sockets in man. A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(4):407–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahn JJ, Shin HI (2008) Bone tissue formation in extraction sockets from sites with advanced periodontal disease: a histomorphometric study in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 23(6):1133–1138Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aimetti M, Manavella V, Corano L, Ercoli E, Bignardi C, Romano F (2018) Three-dimensional analysis of bone remodeling following ridge augmentation of compromised extraction sockets in periodontitis patients: a randomized controlled study. Clin Oral Implants Res 29(2):202–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bertl K, Kukla EB, Albugami R, Beck F, Gahleitner A, Stavropoulos A (2018) Timeframe of socket cortication after tooth extraction: a retrospective radiographic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 29(1):130–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chappuis V, Engel O, Reyes M, Shahim K, Nolte LP, Buser D (2013) Ridge alterations post-extraction in the esthetic zone: a 3D analysis with CBCT. J Dent Res 92(12 Suppl):195s–201sCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tomasi C, Sanz M, Cecchinato D, Pjetursson B, Ferrus J, Lang NP, Lindhe J (2010) Bone dimensional variations at implants placed in fresh extraction sockets: a multilevel multivariate analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(1):30–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    López-Jarana P, Díaz-Castro CM, Falcão A, Falcão C, Ríos-Santos JV, Herrero-Climent M (2018) Thickness of the buccal bone wall and root angulation in the maxilla and mandible: an approach to cone beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health 18(1):194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Braut V, Bornstein MM, Belser U, Buser D (2011) Thickness of the anterior maxillary facial bone wall-a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 31(2):125–131Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Januário AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araújo MG, Lindhe J (2011) Dimension of the facial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res 22(10):1168–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghassemian M, Nowzari H, Lajolo C, Verdugo F, Pirronti T, D'Addona A (2012) The thickness of facial alveolar bone overlying healthy maxillary anterior teeth. J Periodontol 83(2):187–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vera C, De Kok IJ, Reinhold D, Limpiphipatanakorn P, Yap AK, Tyndall D, Cooper LF (2012) Evaluation of buccal alveolar bone dimension of maxillary anterior and premolar teeth: a cone beam computed tomography investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27(6):1514–1519Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nowzari H, Molayem S, Chiu CH, Rich SK (2012) Cone beam computed tomographic measurement of maxillary central incisors to determine prevalence of facial alveolar bone width >/=2 mm. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14(4):595–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim YJ, Park JM, Kim S, Koo KT, Seol YJ, Lee YM, Rhyu IC, Ku Y (2016) New method of assessing the relationship between buccal bone thickness and gingival thickness. J Periodontal Implant Sci 46(6):372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fuentes R, Flores T, Navarro P, Salamanca C, Beltrán V, Borie E (2015) Assessment of buccal bone thickness of aesthetic maxillary region: a cone-beam computed tomography study. J Periodontal Implant Sci 45(5):162–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    El Nahass H, N Naiem S (2015) Analysis of the dimensions of the labial bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(4):e57–e61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huynh-Ba G, Pjetursson BE, Sanz M, Cecchinato D, Ferrus J, Lindhe J, Lang NP (2010) Analysis of the socket bone wall dimensions in the upper maxilla in relation to immediate implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(1):37–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Temple KE, Schoolfield J, Noujeim ME, Huynh-Ba G, Lasho DJ, Mealey BL (2016) A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study of buccal plate thickness of the maxillary and mandibular posterior dentition. Clin Oral Implants Res 27(9):1072–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Braut V, Bornstein MM, Lauber R, Buser D (2012) Bone dimensions in the posterior mandible: a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Part 1--analysis of dentate sites. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 32(2):175–184Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zekry A, Wang R, Chau AC, Lang NP (2014) Facial alveolar bone wall width - a cone-beam computed tomography study in Asians. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(2):194–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Papapanou PN, Sanz M, Buduneli N, Dietrich T, Feres M, Fine DH, Flemmig TF, Garcia R, Giannobile WV, Graziani F, Greenwell H, Herrera D, Kao RT, Kebschull M, Kinane DF, Kirkwood KL, Kocher T, Kornman KS, Kumar PS, Loos BG, Machtei E, Meng H, Mombelli A, Needleman I, Offenbacher S, Seymour GJ, Teles R, Tonetti MS (2018) Periodontitis: consensus report of workgroup 2 of the 2017 world workshop on the classification of periodontal and Peri-implant diseases and conditions. J Periodontol 89(Suppl 1):S173–s182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Braz-Silva PH, Bergamini ML, Mardegan AP, De Rosa CS, Hasseus B, Jonasson P (2019) Inflammatory profile of chronic apical periodontitis: a literature review. Acta Odontol Scand 77(3):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khoury J, Ghosn N, Mokbel N, Naaman N (2016) Buccal bone thickness overlying maxillary anterior teeth: a clinical and radiographic prospective human study. Implant Dent 25(4):525–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Farahamnd A, Sarlati F, Eslami S, Ghassemian M, Youssefi N, Jafarzadeh Esfahani B (2017) Evaluation of impacting factors on facial bone thickness in the anterior maxillary region. J Craniofac Surg 28(3):700–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rojo-Sanchis J, Viña-Almunia J, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Peñarrocha-Diago M (2017) Facial alveolar bone width at the first and second maxillary premolars in healthy patients: a cone beam computed tomography study. J Oral Implantol 43(4):261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Misawa M, Lindhe J, Araujo MG (2016) The alveolar process following single-tooth extraction: a study of maxillary incisor and premolar sites in man. Clin Oral Implants Res 27(7):884–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bornstein MM, Horner K, Jacobs R (2017) Use of cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: current concepts, indications and limitations for clinical practice and research. Periodontol 73(1):51–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nickenig HJ, Eitner S (2007) Reliability of implant placement after virtual planning of implant positions using cone beam CT data and surgical (guide) templates. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 35(4–5):207–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Watanabe H, Honda E, Tetsumura A, Kurabayashi T (2011) A comparative study for spatial resolution and subjective image characteristics of a multi-slice CT and a cone-beam CT for dental use. Eur J Radiol 77(3):397–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Torres MG, Campos PS, Segundo NP, Navarro M, Crusoé-Rebello I (2012) Accuracy of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes. Implant Dent 21(2):150–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nikneshan S, Aval SH, Bakhshalian N, Shahab S (2014) Mohammadpour M4, Sarikhani S5. Accuracy of linear measurement using cone-beam computed tomography at different reconstruction angles. Imaging Sci Dent 44(4):257–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM (2018) Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 29(Suppl 16):393–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ferrus J, Cecchinato D, Pjetursson EB, Lang NP, Sanz M, Lindhe J (2010) Factors influencing ridge alterations following immediate implant placement into extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(1):22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ausra Ramanauskaite
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • K. Becker
    • 1
    • 3
  • H. C. Kassira
    • 4
  • J. Becker
    • 2
  • R. Sader
    • 5
  • F. Schwarz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oral Surgery and ImplantologyCarolinum Goethe UniversityFrankfurt am MainGermany
  2. 2.Department of Oral SurgeryUniversitätsklinikum DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
  3. 3.Department of OrthodonticsUniversitätsklinikum DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
  4. 4.Private practiceWuppertalGermany
  5. 5.Department for Oral, Cranio-Maxillofacial and Facial Plastic SurgeryMedical Center of the Goethe University FrankfurtFrankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations