Cone beam CT--anatomic assessment and legal issues: the new standards of care.

Until the recent introduction of cone beam computed tomography scanners, standard 2-D imaging provided a moderate contribution to overall treatment planning when considering the diagnostic potential, costs of study, and risks to the patient. Cone beam computed tomography-dedicated maxillofacial imaging scanners provide broader imaging tools for anatomic assessment and have become widely available. This article discusses the uses and benefits of 3-D imaging, as well as the impact on the standard of care.

[1]  B. Le,et al.  Avoiding injury to the inferior alveolar nerve by routine use of intraoperative radiographs during implant placement. , 2008, The Journal of oral implantology.

[2]  David C Hatcher,et al.  Cone beam CT for pre-surgical assessment of implant sites. , 2003, Journal of the California Dental Association.

[3]  D. Hatcher,et al.  Radiation absorbed in maxillofacial imaging with a new dental computed tomography device. , 2003, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[4]  K. Oikarinen,et al.  Comparison of three radiographic methods used to locate the mandibular canal in the buccolingual direction before bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. , 2002, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[5]  A Wenzel,et al.  Impact of conventional tomography on prediction of the appropriate implant size. , 2001, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[6]  M Cohnen,et al.  A comparison of conventional panoramic radiographs with volumetric computed tomography images in the preoperative assessment of impacted mandibular third molars. , 2002, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[7]  David C Hatcher,et al.  New diagnostic tools in orthodontics. , 2004, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[8]  J E Zöller,et al.  Use of an image-guided navigation system in dental implant surgery in anatomically complex operation sites. , 2001, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[9]  S Shalev,et al.  Three dimensional craniofacial imaging. , 1988, Annals of dentistry.

[10]  David C Hatcher,et al.  Comparison between traditional 2-dimensional cephalometry and a 3-dimensional approach on human dry skulls. , 2004, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[11]  A Trosien,et al.  Craniofacial imaging in orthodontics: historical perspective, current status, and future developments. , 1999, The Angle orthodontist.

[12]  D M Almog,et al.  Fabrication of imaging and surgical guides for dental implants. , 2001, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[13]  G Schultes,et al.  Navigational precision of drilling tools preventing damage to the mandibular canal. , 2001, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[14]  D. Hatcher,et al.  Mesiodistal root angulation using panoramic and cone beam CT. , 2007, The Angle orthodontist.

[15]  S A Stratemann,et al.  Comparison of cone beam computed tomography imaging with physical measures. , 2008, Dento maxillo facial radiology.