The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry · 2025
Effect of T1 and T2 Magnetic Resonance Protocols on Bone Volume Measurement and Image Quality During Dental Implant Planning.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parize H, Munhoz F, Cordeiro C, Meier N, Kleinheinz J, Laganá D C, Sesma N, Bohner L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols (T1- and T2-weighted) with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for measurement of bone volume and image quality in edentulous mandible during dental implant planning.
METHODS: A phantom was scanned using CBCT and MRI and two examiners measured bone volume (linear measurements) and assessed image quality (visualization of anatomical structures) with 5-point scale. Linear measurement reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient, and group differences with Friedman's and Wilcoxon's tests. The image quality ratings were classified as clinically nonvalid (score≤2) or valid (score≥3), reliability was assessed with percentage of agreement, and group differences with chi-squared test.
RESULTS: Reliability of linear measurements was mostly very good for CBCT (0.748- 0.981), good for T1-weighted (0.674-0.924), and fair to T2-weighted images (0.201- 0.851). Significant differences were observed between imaging exams (p⟨.032) and between T1- and T2-weighted images (p⟨.046), except for alveolar ridge height (p=.119). CBCT showed the highest agreement and validity (100%), followed by T2-weighted (80% agreement, 90% validity), and T1-weighted (77% agreement, 82.5% validity), with no significant differences among modalities (p=.054).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBCT, T1- and T2-weighted MRI protocols had significantly lower reproducibility and accuracy in measuring bone volume, with reduced image quality, especially for visualizing the mandibular nerve canal.
METHODS: A phantom was scanned using CBCT and MRI and two examiners measured bone volume (linear measurements) and assessed image quality (visualization of anatomical structures) with 5-point scale. Linear measurement reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient, and group differences with Friedman's and Wilcoxon's tests. The image quality ratings were classified as clinically nonvalid (score≤2) or valid (score≥3), reliability was assessed with percentage of agreement, and group differences with chi-squared test.
RESULTS: Reliability of linear measurements was mostly very good for CBCT (0.748- 0.981), good for T1-weighted (0.674-0.924), and fair to T2-weighted images (0.201- 0.851). Significant differences were observed between imaging exams (p⟨.032) and between T1- and T2-weighted images (p⟨.046), except for alveolar ridge height (p=.119). CBCT showed the highest agreement and validity (100%), followed by T2-weighted (80% agreement, 90% validity), and T1-weighted (77% agreement, 82.5% validity), with no significant differences among modalities (p=.054).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBCT, T1- and T2-weighted MRI protocols had significantly lower reproducibility and accuracy in measuring bone volume, with reduced image quality, especially for visualizing the mandibular nerve canal.