Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to verify the accuracy of linear measurements performed on low-dose CBCT protocols for implant planning, in comparison with those performed on standard and high-resolution CBCT protocols.
Methods: The literature search included four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus). Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts according to eligibility criteria, extracted the data, and examined the methodological quality. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used for pooling measurement error data.
Results: The initial search yielded 4684 titles. In total, 13 studies were included in the systematic review, representing a total of 81 samples, while 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias ranged from medium to low. The main results across the studies indicate a strong consistency in linear measurements performed on low-dose images in relation to the reference methods. The overall pooled planning measurement error from low-dose CBCT protocols was -0.24 mm (95% CI, -0.52 to 0.04) with a high level of heterogeneity, showing a tendency for underestimation of real values. Various studies found no significant differences in measurements across different protocols (eg, voxel sizes, mA settings, or dose levels), regions (incisor, premolar, molar) and types (height vs. width). Some studies, however, noted exceptions in measurements performed on the posterior mandible.
Conclusion: Low-dose CBCT protocols offer adequate precision and accuracy of linear measurements for implant planning. Nevertheless, diagnostic image quality needs must be taken into consideration when choosing a low-dose CBCT protocol.
Keywords: cone-beam computed tomography; dental implants; radiation dosage; systematic review.
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Institute of Radiology and the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.