Objective. To define the presence and prevalence of incidental findings in and around the base of skull from large field-of-view CBCT of the maxillofacial region and to determine their clinical importance.Methods. Four hundred consecutive large fields of view CBCT scans viewed from January 1, 2007, to January 1, 2014, were retrospectively evaluated for incidental findings of the cervical vertebrae and surrounding structures. Findings were categorized into cervical vertebrae, intracranial, soft tissue, airway, carotid artery, lymph node, and skull base findings.Results. A total of 653 incidental findings were identified in 309 of the 400 CBCT scans. The most prevalent incidental findings were soft tissue calcifications (29.71%), followed by intracranial calcifications (27.11%), cervical vertebrae (20.06%), airway (11.49%), external carotid artery calcification (10.41%), lymph node calcification (0.77%), subcutaneous tissue calcification and calcified tendonitis of the longus colli muscle (0.3%), and skull base finding (0.15%). A significant portion of the incidental findings (31.24%) required referral, 17.76% required monitoring, and 51% did not require either.Conclusion. A comprehensive review of the CBCT images beyond the region of interest, especially incidental findings in the base of skull, cervical vertebrae, pharyngeal airway, and soft tissue, is necessary to avoid overlooking clinically significant lesions.

Theofilos Koutouzis, DDS, MS/Rodrigo Neiva, DDS, MS/Madhu Nair, DDS, PhD/J?rg Nonhoff, DDS, PhD/Tord Lundgren, DDS, PhD: Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate marginal bone levels, with cone beam computed tomography, on the buccal and lingual aspects of implants placed with the implant-abutment interface (IAI) at different positions in relation to the alveolar crest. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients in need of single-tooth rehabilitation were randomly assigned to three groups based on the position of the IAI in relation to the buccal aspect of the alveolar crest at the time of implant placement. Patients in groups 0, 1, and 2 had their implants placed level with the buccal crest or 1 or 2 mm apical to the buccal aspect of the alveolar crest, respectively. The implants were restored with screw-retained single crowns after 4 months. Marginal bone levels on the buccal and lingual aspects of the implants were evaluated at 12 months after implant placement. Results: All groups of implants demonstrated significantly different crestal positions. Group 2 implants maintained the greatest subcrestal position (1.33 ? 0.86 mm) compared to the implants of group 0 (?0.04 ? 0.18 mm) and group 1 (0.34 ? 0.44 mm). There were no differences between groups in the level of the first bone-to-implant contact relative to the implant platform. Implants of group 0 exhibited less buccal bone remodeling (?0.08 ? 0.25 mm) compared to group 1 (?0.65 ? 0.45 mm) and group 2 (?0.85 ? 0.75 mm) implants. For groups 1 and 2 implants, there was a significant negative correlation between buccal wall thickness following the osteotomy and the amount of buccal bone remodeling. Conclusion: In this study, different responses were seen in the buccal and lingual peri-implant bone for implants with platform-switched Morse taper connections placed with the IAI at different locations in relation to the alveolar crest.

Tahmasbi-Arashlow M, et al. Imaging Sci Dent. 2016 Mar;46(1):53-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2016.46.1.53

Tahmasbi-Arashlow M, et al. Imaging Sci Dent. 2022 Apr;52:e20. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20220130

Arora P, et al. Imaging Sci Dent. 2023 Jun;53:e20. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20230040