AIM: A successful implant therapy is based on an accurate assessment of the anatomy of the jaws. The aim of our study was to evaluate the reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MR) compared with computed tomography (CT) for dental implant planning in respect to bone measurements and to observe and analyze the differences. METHOD: We have studied 30 cases in which scans were performed with CT and MR. The images provided by the MR and CT examinations were delivered to three specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology to measure the bone height at the specific sites.The measurements obtained by the specialists in MR and CT images were compared using the ANOVA test with a 0.05 significance level. RESULT: In all 30 cases examined, MR images appeared perfectly comparable to CT images. The differences between the measurements from the MR and CT exams varied from 0.04 to 1.1 mm. There were no statistically significant differences (P=0.9). CONCLUSION: The MR, when compared with CT, shown to be reliable in respect to bone measurements for dental implant planning. However, further studies are necessary to determine the technical advantages of Resonance at lower fields, compared with those of CT and MR with medium or high magnetic field.
AIM: A successful implant therapy is based on an accurate assessment of the anatomy of the jaws. The aim of our study was to evaluate the reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MR) compared with computed tomography (CT) for dental implant planning in respect to bone measurements and to observe and analyze the differences. METHOD: We have studied 30 cases in which scans were performed with CT and MR. The images provided by the MR and CT examinations were delivered to three specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology to measure the bone height at the specific sites.The measurements obtained by the specialists in MR and CT images were compared using the ANOVA test with a 0.05 significance level. RESULT: In all 30 cases examined, MR images appeared perfectly comparable to CT images. The differences between the measurements from the MR and CT exams varied from 0.04 to 1.1 mm. There were no statistically significant differences (P=0.9). CONCLUSION: The MR, when compared with CT, shown to be reliable in respect to bone measurements for dental implant planning. However, further studies are necessary to determine the technical advantages of Resonance at lower fields, compared with those of CT and MR with medium or high magnetic field.
Keywords:
Magnetic Resonance Imaging; computed tomography; dental implant; implant planning
Authors: Alexander Heil; Franz Sebastian Schwindling; Constanze Jelinek; Manuel Fischer; Marcel Prager; Eduardo Lazo Gonzalez; Martin Bendszus; Sabine Heiland; Tim Hilgenfeld Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Lauren Bohner; Pedro Tortamano; Norbert Meier; Felix Gremse; Johannes Kleinheinz; Marcel Hanisch Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 3.390