Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2025
Author Spotlight: Advancing CBCT and Digital Dental Image Integration with AI-Assisted Digitization
Published on: February 23, 2024
Evaluation of the accuracy of buccal bone thickness measurement from cone beam computed tomography compared with
Yoshiatsu Tanaka1, Vinicius Dutra2, Wei-Shao Lin3
1Resident, Postdoctoral Program in Prosthodontics, Department of Prosthodontics, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, Ind.
Statement Of Problem:
Three-dimensional radiographic assessment of buccal bone thickness and its integrity from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) plays an essential role in immediate implant placement. However, the accuracy of CBCT measurements for the assessment of buccal bone thickness adjacent to maxillary anterior teeth is not well understood.
Purpose:
The purpose of this observational study was to evaluate the accuracy of measuring the buccal bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth from CBCT compared with direct measurement from histologic sections. A secondary objective was to analyze whether a minimal level of buccal bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth can be detected from the CBCT scan.
Material And Methods:
Five embalmed human cadavers with a complete anterior dentition were included in this study, providing 30 teeth for evaluation. After preparing reference notches at the gingival margin of each tooth, the anterior segments were scanned. The buccal bone thickness at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the notches was measured on the cross-sections obtained from the CBCT and histomorphometric images for a total of 90 sites. The CBCT measurements were compared with the histomorphometric measurements, and their agreement was assessed by using the Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients. The sensitivity and specificity of buccal bone detection were calculated from the CBCT scan.
Results:
Histologic examination showed absence of the buccal bone in 29 sites (32%). The mean ±standard deviation thickness of the buccal bone was 0.52 ±0.05 mm (range: 0 to 1.97 mm) from the CBCT analysis and 0.40 ±0.05 mm (range: 0 to 1.67 mm) from histology. Measurements obtained from the CBCT sections significantly overestimated the buccal bone thickness when compared with the histologic evaluation (P=.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient of buccal bone thickness between the CBCT and histology was ≤0.53, an agreement considered as poor. The sensitivity of the CBCT as a diagnostic tool to detect the presence or absence of the buccal bone was 75.4%, and the specificity was 65.5%.
Conclusions:
The buccal bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth was less than 2 mm at all sites as measured with both CBCT and histology evaluations. CBCT measurements had relatively low accuracy and reliability for the measurement of buccal bone thickness. These findings should be considered when using CBCT as a measuring tool for thin bone structures.
