Advertisement

Current Applications

  • Farah MasoodEmail author
  • Onur Kadioglu
  • G. Fräns Currier
Chapter

Abstract

With the introduction of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), the practice of dentistry has taken a new approach. Before the emergence of this technology, most of the dental professionals depended on the conventional two-dimensional (2-D) radiographic imaging for treatment planning and evaluation. Previously, the multi-detector computed tomography or medical CT scanners were utilized for assessment of pathology and trauma cases in dentistry. CBCT technology has found its way into the dental offices and offers many advantages and specific clinical applications for both specialist and general dentists. CBCT image quality is superior as compared to 2-D as structures can be viewed without superimposition and distortion, in three dimensions.

Keywords

CBCT Cone beam computed tomography Oral surgery Orthodontics 

References

  1. 1.
    American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Clinical recommendations regarding use of cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics. Position statement by the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013;116:238–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. The use of cone-beam tomography in dentistry. An advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143:899–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hodges RJ, Atchison KA, White SC. Impact of cone-beam computed tomography on orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2013;143:665–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rischen RJ, Breuning KH, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Records needed for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning: a systematic review. PLoS One 2013; 8: e74186. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Kuijpers MAR, Schols JGJH, Maal TJJ, Breuning KH, Vlijmen OJCV. Use of cone-beam computed tomography for orthodontic purposes. Seminars in Orthodontics. 2013;19(3):196–203. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2013.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lai CS, Bornstein MM, Mock L, Heuberger BM, Dietrich T, Katsaros C. Impacted maxillary canines and root resorptions of neighbouring teeth: a radiographic analysis using cone-beam computed tomography. Eur J Orthod 2013; 35: 529–538. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjs037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kapila S, Nervina JM. 3D Image-aided diagnosis and treatment of impacted and transposed teeth. In: Kapila S, Cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics: indications, insights and innovations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2014. pp. 349–381.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wriedt S, Jaklin J, Al-Nawas B, Wehrbein H. Impacted upper canines: examination and treatment proposal based on 3D versus 2D diagnosis. J Orofac Orthop 2012; 73: 28–40. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-011-0058-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kapila S, Conley RS, Harrell WE. The current status of come beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(1):24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marquezan M, Osorio A, Sant'Anna E, Souza MM, Maia L. Does bone mineral density influence the primary stability of dental implants? A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 767–774. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02228.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hajeer MY, Millett DT, Ayoub AF, et al. Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: part I. J Orthod. 2004;31:62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Faisal AQ, Savell TA, Palomo JM. Applications of cone beam computed tomography in the practice of oral and maxilliofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66:791–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alexiou K, Stamatakis H, Tsiklakis K. Evaluation of the severity of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritic changes related to age using cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009; 38: 141–147. doi:https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/59263880.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nielsen IL. Vertical malocclusions: etiology, development, diagnosis and some aspects of treatment. Angle Orthod. 1991;61:247–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Han S, Choi YJ, Chung CJ, Kim JY, Kim KH. Long-term pharyngeal airway changes after bionator treatment in adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusions. Korean J Orthod 2014; 44: 13–19. doi:https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2014.44.1.13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Celikoglu M, Bayram M, Sekerci AE, Buyuk SK, Toy E. Comparison of pharyngeal airway volume among different vertical skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Angle Orthod 2014; 84: 782–787. doi:https://doi.org/10.2319/101013-748.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grauer D, Cevidanes LS, Styner MA, Ackerman JL, Proffit WR. Pharyngeal airway volume and shape from cone-beam computed tomography: relationship to facial morphology. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2009; 136: 805–814. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.01.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kapila S, Nervina JM. Alveolar boundary conditions in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. In: Kapila S. Cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics: indications, insights and innovations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2014. pp. 293–316.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cha JY, Mah J, Sinclair P. Incidental findings in the maxillofacial area with 3-dimensional cone-beam imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(1):7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Drage N, Rogers S, Greenall C, Playle R. Incidental findings on cone beam computed tomography in orthodontic patients. J Orthod. 2013;40(1):29–37. https://doi.org/10.1179/1465313312Y.0000000027.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Avsever H, Gunduz K, Karakoc O, Akyol M, Orhan K. Incidental findings on cone-beam computed tomographic images: paranasal sinus findings and nasal septum variations. Oral Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-017-0283-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Edwards R, Alsufyani N, Heo G, Flores-Mir C. Agreement among orthodontists experienced with cone-beam computed tomography on the need for follow-up and the clinical impact of craniofacial findings from multiplanar and 3-dimensional reconstructed views. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2015;148(2):264–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.03.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Allareddy V, Vincent SD, Hellstein JW, Qian F, Smoker WRK, Ruprecht A. Incidental findings on cone beam computed tomography images. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:871532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edwards R, Alsufyani N, Heo G, Flores-Mir C. The frequency and nature of incidental findings in large-field cone beam computed tomography scans of an orthodontic sample. Prog Orthod. 2014;15(1):37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-014-0037-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Price JB, Thaw KL, Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB, Padilla RJ. Incidental findings from cone beam computed tomography of the maxillofacial region: a descriptive retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(11):1261–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02299.x. Epub 2011 Sep 30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mutalik S, Tadinada A. Prevalence of pineal gland calcifications as an incidental finding in patients referred for implant dental therapy. Imag Sc Dent. 2017;47:175–80. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2017.47.3.175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rosenfeld RM, Piccirillo JF, Chandrasekhar SS, Brook I, Ashok Kumar K, Kramper M, Orlandi RR, Palmer JN, Patel ZM, Peters A, Walsh SA, Corrigan MD. Clinical practice guideline (update): adult sinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;152(2 Suppl):S1–S39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599815572097.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kapila SD. Cone beam computed tomography in orthodontics: indications, insights, and innovations. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Turpin DL. Befriend your oral and maxillofacial radiologist. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;131(6):697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Çağlayan F, Tozoğlu Ü. Incidental findings in the maxillofacial region detected by cone beam CT. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2012;18:159–63. https://doi.org/10.4261/1305-3825.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farah Masood
    • 1
    Email author
  • Onur Kadioglu
    • 2
  • G. Fräns Currier
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Oral Diagnosis and Radiology, Department of Diagnostic and Preventive SciencesUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center College of DentistryOklahoma CityUSA
  2. 2.Division of Orthodontics, Department of Developmental SciencesUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center College of DentistryOklahoma CityUSA

Personalised recommendations