Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 2, 2026
Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures
Published on: August 5, 2021
Analyzing Dental Implant Sites From Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans on a Tablet Computer: A Comparative Study
Alejandro Carrasco1, Elnaz Jalali, Ajay Dhingra
1*Graduate Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Connecticut, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, CT. †Assistant Professor, Department of Reconstructive Sciences, University of Connecticut, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, CT. ‡Professor and Chair, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, CT. §Assistant Professor, Division of Orthodontics, University of Connecticut Health Center, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, CT. ¶Program Director, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, CT.
Purpose:
The aim of this study was to compare a medical-grade PACS (picture archiving and communication system) monitor, a consumer-grade monitor, a laptop computer, and a tablet computer for linear measurements of height and width for specific implant sites in the posterior maxilla and mandible, along with visualization of the associated anatomical structures.
Material And Methods:
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were evaluated. The images were reviewed using PACS-LCD monitor, consumer-grade LCD monitor using CB-Works software, a 13″ MacBook Pro, and an iPad 4 using OsiriX DICOM reader software. The operators had to identify anatomical structures in each display using a 2-point scale. User experience between PACS and iPad was also evaluated by means of a questionnaire.
Results:
The measurements were very similar for each device. P-values were all greater than 0.05, indicating no significant difference between the monitors for each measurement. The intraoperator reliability was very high. The user experience was similar in each category with the most significant difference regarding the portability where the PACS display received the lowest score and the iPad received the highest score.
Conclusions:
The iPad with retina display was comparable with the medical-grade monitor, producing similar measurements and image visualization, and thus providing an inexpensive, portable, and reliable screen to analyze CBCT images in the operating room during the implant surgery.
