Digital subtraction radiography in assessing bone changes in periodontal defects following guided tissue regeneration.

19 patients with a total of 23 periodontal lesions were selected for the study. Following flap-elevation, an occlusive membrane (Gore Tex) adjusted to the size and shape of the lesion was applied. The membrane was removed 4-6 weeks later by a 2nd operation. Clinical attachment levels were measured and intraoral radiographs taken prior to surgery, and 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The root length and marginal bone level were measured on paper drawings of the teeth magnified (15x) from the conventional radiographs. The radiographs were digitized for analysis of the subtraction images between the preoperative and the 6- and 12-month postoperative images. Clinical attachment gain was seen in 78% of the teeth after 6 months and 70% after 12 months. Bone gain was recorded in 56% and 22% after 6 months and in 44% and 66% after 12 months by conventional and digital subtraction radiography, respectively. The bone level measurements on conventional radiographs differed significantly (p = 0.001) between the preoperative and 6-month postoperative, but not between the 6- and 12-month, (p = 0.29) conventional radiographs. There was no significant relationship between the clinical measurements and the assessments of bone changes on conventional radiographs (r = 0.28, p = 0.25), while a stronger relationship was observed between assessment of clinical attachment gain and assessment of bone changes on the subtraction images (r = 0.58, p = 0.01).

[1]  T. Karring,et al.  Regeneration of surgically removed buccal alveolar bone in dogs. , 1979, Journal of periodontal research.

[2]  I. Sewerin Device for serial intraoral radiography with controlled projection angles. , 1990, Tandlaegebladet.

[3]  J van Aken,et al.  The detection of in vitro produced periodontal bone lesions by conventional radiography and photographic subtraction radiography using observers and quantitative digital subtraction radiography. , 1989, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[4]  C. Lavelle,et al.  Detection of three-walled infrabony defects by subtraction radiography. , 1988, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[5]  L. Christersson,et al.  Progression of untreated periodontitis as assessed by subtraction radiography. , 1986, Journal of periodontal research.

[6]  E. Rosenberg,et al.  Root isolation for new attachment procedures. A surgical and suturing method: three case reports. , 1987, Journal of periodontology.

[7]  M S Reddy,et al.  Extraoral control of geometry for digital subtraction radiography. , 1987, Journal of periodontal research.

[8]  Richard L. Webber,et al.  Exposure Geometry And Film Contrast Differences As Bases For Incomplete Cancellation Of Irrelevant Structures In Dental Subtraction Radiography , 1981, Other Conferences.

[9]  R L Webber,et al.  Computer Correction of Projective Distortions in Dental Radiographs , 1984, Journal of dental research.

[10]  R. Genco,et al.  Microbiological and clinical effects of surgical treatment of localized juvenile periodontitis. , 1985, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[11]  A. Lurie,et al.  Subtraction radiology demonstrates crestal bone loss in experimentally induced marginal periodontitis. , 1983, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[12]  H. Löe,et al.  Errors in the clinical assessment of periodontal destruction. , 1967, Journal of periodontal research.

[13]  S. Ramfjord,et al.  Radiographs in clinical periodontal trials. , 1975, Journal of periodontology.

[14]  T. Karring,et al.  New attachment following surgical treatment of human periodontal disease. , 1982, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[15]  R. L. Webber,et al.  A robust digital method for film contrast correction in subtraction radiography. , 1986, Journal of periodontal research.

[16]  A. Wenzel Effect of image enhancement for detectability of bone lesions in digitized intraoral radiographs. , 1988, Scandinavian journal of dental research.

[17]  H G Gröndahl,et al.  Digital subtraction radiography for diagnosis of periodontal bone lesions with simulated high-speed systems. , 1983, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[18]  A Wenzel,et al.  Sources of noise in digital subtraction radiography. , 1991, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[19]  M. Ohki,et al.  A contrast-correction method for digital subtraction radiography. , 1988, Journal of periodontal research.

[20]  G Greenstein,et al.  Diagnosis of bone lesions by subtraction radiography. , 1985, Journal of periodontology.

[21]  R. Caffesse,et al.  New attachment achieved by guided tissue regeneration in beagle dogs. , 1988, Journal of periodontology.

[22]  A Wenzel Effect of manual compared with reference point superimposition on image quality in digital subtraction radiography. , 1989, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[23]  E Hausmann,et al.  Usefulness of Subtraction Radiography in the Evaluation of Periodontal Therapy. , 1985, Journal of periodontology.

[24]  E Hausmann,et al.  Methodological aspects and quantitative adjuncts to computerized subtraction radiography. , 1987, Journal of periodontal research.

[25]  F. Isidor,et al.  Long-term effect of surgical and non-surgical periodontal treatment. A 5-year clinical study. , 1986, Journal of periodontal research.

[26]  T. Karring,et al.  Guided tissue regeneration in degree II furcation-involved mandibular molars. A clinical study. , 1988, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[27]  H G Gröndahl,et al.  Subtraction radiography for the diagnosis of periodontal bone lesions. , 1983, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[28]  S C White,et al.  Film-holding instruments for intraoral subtraction radiography. , 1988, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[29]  E Hausmann,et al.  Subtraction radiography and computer assisted densitometric analyses of standardized radiographs. A comparison study with 125I absorptiometry. , 1985, Journal of periodontal research.

[30]  J. Wennström,et al.  New attachment formation in the human periodontium by guided tissue regeneration. Case reports. , 1986, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[31]  T. Karring,et al.  Connective tissue attachment formation following exclusion of gingival connective tissue and epithelium during healing. , 1985, Journal of periodontal research.

[32]  H. Gröndahl,et al.  Detectability of artificial marginal bone lesions as a function of lesion depth. A comparison between subtraction radiography and conventional radiographic technique. , 1988, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[33]  J. Egelberg,et al.  Healing after treatment of periodontal intraosseous defects. I. Comparative study of clinical methods. , 1981, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[34]  T. Karring,et al.  New attachment formation as the result of controlled tissue regeneration. , 1984, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[35]  U. Ruttimann,et al.  Effect of periodontal therapy on alveolar bone as measured by subtraction radiography. , 1988, Journal of periodontology.

[36]  M. Ohki,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of proximal bone lesions using digital subtraction radiography. , 1988, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[37]  T. Karring,et al.  New attachment formation by guided tissue regeneration. , 1987, Journal of periodontal research.

[38]  T. Karring,et al.  Guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of furcation defects in mandibular molars. A clinical study of degree III involvements. , 1989, Journal of clinical periodontology.