NOTE The report of the Committee without its annexes appears as Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 46. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The country names used in this document are, in most cases, those that were in use at the time the data were collected or the text prepared. In other cases, however, the names have been updated, where this was possible and appropriate, to reflect political changes. Scientific Annexes Annex A. Medical radiation exposures Annex B. Exposures of the public and workers from various sources of radiation INTROdUCTION 1. In the course of the research and development for and the application of atomic energy and nuclear technologies, a number of radiation accidents have occurred. Some of these accidents have resulted in significant health effects and occasionally in fatal outcomes. The application of technologies that make use of radiation is increasingly widespread around the world. Millions of people have occupations related to the use of radiation, and hundreds of millions of individuals benefit from these uses. Facilities using intense radiation sources for energy production and for purposes such as radiotherapy, sterilization of products, preservation of foodstuffs and gamma radiography require special care in the design and operation of equipment to avoid radiation injury to workers or to the public. Experience has shown that such technology is generally used safely, but on occasion controls have been circumvented and serious radiation accidents have ensued. 2. Reviews of radiation exposures from accidents have been presented in previous UNSCEAR reports. The last report containing an exclusive chapter on exposures from accidents was the UNSCEAR 1993 Report [U6]. 3. This annex is aimed at providing a sound basis for conclusions regarding the number of significant radiation accidents that have occurred, the corresponding levels of radiation exposures and numbers of deaths and injuries, and the general trends for various practices. Its conclusions are to be seen in the context of the Committee's overall evaluations of the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. 4. The Committee's evaluations of public, occupational and medical diagnostic exposures are mostly concerned with chronic exposures of …

sources and effects of ionizing radiation

Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) systems have been designed for imaging hard tissues of the maxillofacial region. CBCT is capable of providing sub-millimetre resolution in images of high diagnostic quality, with short scanning times (10-70 seconds) and radiation dosages reportedly up to 15 times lower than those of conventional CT scans. Increasing availability of this technology provides the dental clinician with an imaging modality capable of providing a 3-dimensional representation of the maxillofacial skeleton with minimal distortion. This article provides an overview of currently available maxillofacial CBCT systems and reviews the specific application of various CBCT display modes to clinical dental practice.

/pdf/clinical-applications-of-cone-beam-computed-tomography-in-4kp8tgr2p7.pdf

Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice.

Objective: To systematically review the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant therapy reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years.

Methods:  A MEDLINE search was conducted for prospective longitudinal studies with follow-up periods of at least 5 years. Screening and data abstraction were performed independently by multiple reviewers. The types of complications assessed were as follows: implant loss, sensory disturbance, soft tissue complications, peri-implantitis, bone loss ≥2.5 mm, implant fracture and technical complications related to implant components and suprastructures.

Results:  The search provided 1310 titles and abstracts, out of which 159 were selected for full-text analysis. Finally, 51 studies were included. Meta analysis of these studies indicated that implant loss prior to functional loading is to be expected to occur in about 2.5% of all implants placed in implant therapy including more than one implant and when routine procedures are used. Implant loss during function occurs in about 2–3% of implants supporting fixed reconstructions, while in overdenture therapy >5% of the implants can be expected to be lost during a 5-year period. Few studies (41% of those included) reported data on the incidence of persisting sensory disturbance >1 year following implant surgery. Most of the studies that provided such data reported on the absence or a low incidence (1–2%) of this complication beyond this interval. A higher incidence of soft tissue complications was reported for patients treated with implants supporting overdentures. There is limited information regarding the occurrence of peri-implantitis and implants exhibiting bone loss ≥2.5 mm. Implant fracture is a rare complication and occurs in <1% of all implants during a 5-year period. The incidence of technical complications related to implant components and suprastructures was higher in overdentures than in fixed reconstructions.

Conclusion:  Implant loss was most frequently described (reported in about 100% of studies), while biological complications were considered in only 40–60% and technical complications in only 60–80% of the studies. This observation indicates that data on the incidence of biological and technical complications may be underestimated and should be interpreted with caution.

A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years

What is Cone-Beam CT and How Does it Work?

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the 5-year survival of implant-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological and technical complications. METHODS: An electronic MEDLINE search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on SCs with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies from an initial yield of 3601 titles were finally selected and data were extracted. In a meta-analysis of these studies, survival of implants supporting SCs was 96.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 95.9-97.6%] after 5 years. The survival rate of SCs supported by implants was 94.5% (95% CI: 92.5-95.9%) after 5 years of function. The survival rate of metal-ceramic crowns, 95.4% (95% CI: 93.6-96.7%), was significantly (P=0.005) higher than the survival rate, 91.2% (95% CI: 86.8-94.2%), of all-ceramic crowns. Peri-implantitis and soft tissue complications occurred adjacent to 9.7% of the SCs and 6.3% of the implants had bone loss exceeding 2 mm over the 5-year observation period. The cumulative incidence of implant fractures after 5 years was 0.14%. After 5 years, the cumulative incidence of screw or abutment loosening was 12.7% and 0.35% for screw or abutment fracture. For supra-structure-related complications, the cumulative incidence of ceramic or veneer fractures was 4.5%. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that after an observation period of 5 years, high survival rates for implants and implant-supported SCs can be expected. However, biological and particularly technical complications are frequent.

/pdf/a-systematic-review-of-the-5-year-survival-and-complication-2taohaw9al.pdf

A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns

The principle of guided bone regeneration can be applied for localized ridge augmentation in a staged approach. The surgical procedure for the mandible is presented through three case reports. Incision technique and flap design, utilization of autogenous bone grafts as a membrane-supporting device and osteoconductive scaffold, proper placement of barrier membranes and their stabilization with miniscrews, and wound closure are all emphasized. Furthermore, factors essential for achieving predictable results with barrier membranes for localized ridge augmentation and the benefits of combining barrier membranes with autogenous bone grafts are discussed.

Localized ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration. 1. Surgical procedure in the maxilla.

Lateral ridge augmentation using autografts and barrier membranes: A clinical study with 40 partially edentulous patients

http://www.endoexperience.com/documents/LowetalcbctJOE2008.PDF

Comparison of periapical radiography and limited cone-beam tomography in posterior maxillary teeth referred for apical surgery.

This review article describes the scientific documentation of one-stage, non-submerged dental implants. In the past 25 years, numerous in vivo studies have demonstrated that non-submerged titanium implants achieve osseointegration as predictable as that of submerged titanium implants. This observation was confirmed in prospective clinical studies, mostly done with the ITI Dental Implant System. ITI implants have been widely documented for up to 10 years of prospective follow-up at various centers. All studies showed success rates well above 90%. In summary, the non-submerged approach is a true alternative to the original healing modality with submerged titanium implants. The non-submerged approach offers several clinical advantages: (i) the avoidance of a second surgical procedure and less chair time per patient, resulting in overall reduced treatment cost; (ii) the lack of microgap at the bone crest level, leading to less crestal bone during healing and resulting in a more favorable crown-to-implant length ratio; and (iii) a simplified prosthetic procedure, presenting an ideal basis for cemented implant restorations. Due to these significant clinical advantages, the non-submerged approach will become more important in implant dentistry in the near future, particularly in implant sites without esthetic priority.

Karl Dula

Papers

Localized ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration. 1. Surgical procedure in the maxilla.

Lateral ridge augmentation using autografts and barrier membranes: A clinical study with 40 partially edentulous patients

Comparison of periapical radiography and limited cone-beam tomography in posterior maxillary teeth referred for apical surgery.

Clinical experience with one-stage, non-submerged dental implants.

Localized ridge augmentation with autografts and barrier membranes