Fabian Duttenhoefer1, Marianne E Mertens2, Josef Vizkelety1, Felix Gremse2, Vincent A Stadelmann3, Sebastian Sauerbier1. 1. Department of Oral and Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 2. Department of Experimental Molecular Imaging, Helmholtz-Institute for Biomedical Engineering, RWTH-Aachen University, Aachen, Germany. 3. AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: X-ray-based planning and post-implantation assessment of titanium implants is the commonly accepted standard to date. However, new implant materials such as zirconia (ZrO2 ) have become available, and magnetic resonance imaging may be a valuable alternative with these implants. The present in vitro study investigated artifacts produced by titanium and zirconia implants in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and assessed the accuracy of pre-implant planning and post-implantation assessment comparing MRI to standard X-ray-based imaging modalities: Orthopantomogram (OPT), cone beam (CBCT), and computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve porcine mandibles were prepared and scanned (MRI, OPT, CBCT, μCT), and bone height above the nerve canal was measured. Specimens were implanted with either two titanium or zirconia implants and rescanned to investigate the influence of implant materials on post-implantation assessment. MRI and μCT artifacts were quantified with implants embedded in gelatin phantoms and porcine specimens. RESULTS: Compared with CBCT set as standard, μCT, OPT, and MRI showed similar accuracy in pre-op bone height measurements. Post-implantation, while titanium implants induced a strong B0 -field distortion resulting in extensive signal voids, zirconia implants were clearly depictable with only minor distortions. CONCLUSIONS: Excellent contrast, limited artifacts, radiation-free and accurate implant assessment may indicate that MRI is a valuable imaging alternative for zirconia-based implant dentistry.
OBJECTIVES: X-ray-based planning and post-implantation assessment of titanium implants is the commonly accepted standard to date. However, new implant materials such as zirconia (ZrO2 ) have become available, and magnetic resonance imaging may be a valuable alternative with these implants. The present in vitro study investigated artifacts produced by titanium and zirconia implants in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and assessed the accuracy of pre-implant planning and post-implantation assessment comparing MRI to standard X-ray-based imaging modalities: Orthopantomogram (OPT), cone beam (CBCT), and computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve porcine mandibles were prepared and scanned (MRI, OPT, CBCT, μCT), and bone height above the nerve canal was measured. Specimens were implanted with either two titanium or zirconia implants and rescanned to investigate the influence of implant materials on post-implantation assessment. MRI and μCT artifacts were quantified with implants embedded in gelatin phantoms and porcine specimens. RESULTS: Compared with CBCT set as standard, μCT, OPT, and MRI showed similar accuracy in pre-op bone height measurements. Post-implantation, while titanium implants induced a strong B0 -field distortion resulting in extensive signal voids, zirconia implants were clearly depictable with only minor distortions. CONCLUSIONS: Excellent contrast, limited artifacts, radiation-free and accurate implant assessment may indicate that MRI is a valuable imaging alternative for zirconia-based implant dentistry.
Authors: Andreas Detterbeck; Michael Hofmeister; Elisabeth Hofmann; Daniel Haddad; Daniel Weber; Astrid Hölzing; Simon Zabler; Matthias Schmid; Karl-Heinz Hiller; Peter Jakob; Jens Engel; Jochen Hiller; Ursula Hirschfelder Journal: J Orofac Orthop Date: 2016-04-20 Impact factor: 1.938
Authors: Katrine Mølgaard Johannsen; João Marcus de Carvalho E Silva Fuglsig; Brian Hansen; Ann Wenzel; Rubens Spin-Neto Journal: Oral Radiol Date: 2022-09-30 Impact factor: 1.882
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
Authors: Mousa Zidan; Franz S Schwindling; Alexander Juerchott; Johannes Mente; Mathias Nittka; Zahra Hosseini; Sabine Heiland; Martin Bendszus; Tim Hilgenfeld Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-08-18 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Felix Gremse; Marius Stärk; Josef Ehling; Jan Robert Menzel; Twan Lammers; Fabian Kiessling Journal: Theranostics Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 11.556