Cargando…

Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

This study aimed to investigate the geometric reproducibility of three-dimensional (3D) implant planning based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Four raters used a backward-planning approach based on CBCT imaging and standard software to position 41 implan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwindling, Franz Sebastian, Boehm, Sophia, Herpel, Christopher, Kronsteiner, Dorothea, Vogel, Lorenz, Juerchott, Alexander, Heiland, Sabine, Bendszus, Martin, Rammelsberg, Peter, Hilgenfeld, Tim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8658654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34884244
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235546
_version_ 1784612781180321792
author Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
Boehm, Sophia
Herpel, Christopher
Kronsteiner, Dorothea
Vogel, Lorenz
Juerchott, Alexander
Heiland, Sabine
Bendszus, Martin
Rammelsberg, Peter
Hilgenfeld, Tim
author_facet Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
Boehm, Sophia
Herpel, Christopher
Kronsteiner, Dorothea
Vogel, Lorenz
Juerchott, Alexander
Heiland, Sabine
Bendszus, Martin
Rammelsberg, Peter
Hilgenfeld, Tim
author_sort Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
collection PubMed
description This study aimed to investigate the geometric reproducibility of three-dimensional (3D) implant planning based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Four raters used a backward-planning approach based on CBCT imaging and standard software to position 41 implants in 27 patients. Implant planning was repeated, and the first and second plans were analyzed for geometric differences regarding implant tip, entry-level, and axis. The procedure was then repeated for MRI data of the same patients. Thus, 656 implant plans were available for analysis of intra-rater reproducibility. For both imaging modalities, the second-round 3D implant plans were re-evaluated regarding inter-rater reproducibility. Differences between the modalities were analyzed using paired t-tests. Intra- and inter-rater reproducibility were higher for CBCT than for MRI. Regarding intra-rater deviations, mean values for MRI were 1.7 ± 1.1 mm/1.5 ± 1.1 mm/5.5 ± 4.2° at implant tip/entry-level/axis. For CBCT, corresponding values were 1.3 ± 0.8 mm/1 ± 0.6 mm/4.5 ± 3.1°. Inter-rater comparisons revealed mean values of 2.2 ± 1.3 mm/1.7 ± 1 mm/7.5 ± 4.9° for MRI, and 1.7 ± 1 mm/1.2 ± 0.7 mm/6 ± 3.7° for CBCT. CBCT-based implant planning was more reproducible than MRI. Nevertheless, more research is needed to increase planning reproducibility—for both modalities—thereby standardizing 3D implant planning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8658654
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86586542021-12-10 Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Schwindling, Franz Sebastian Boehm, Sophia Herpel, Christopher Kronsteiner, Dorothea Vogel, Lorenz Juerchott, Alexander Heiland, Sabine Bendszus, Martin Rammelsberg, Peter Hilgenfeld, Tim J Clin Med Article This study aimed to investigate the geometric reproducibility of three-dimensional (3D) implant planning based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Four raters used a backward-planning approach based on CBCT imaging and standard software to position 41 implants in 27 patients. Implant planning was repeated, and the first and second plans were analyzed for geometric differences regarding implant tip, entry-level, and axis. The procedure was then repeated for MRI data of the same patients. Thus, 656 implant plans were available for analysis of intra-rater reproducibility. For both imaging modalities, the second-round 3D implant plans were re-evaluated regarding inter-rater reproducibility. Differences between the modalities were analyzed using paired t-tests. Intra- and inter-rater reproducibility were higher for CBCT than for MRI. Regarding intra-rater deviations, mean values for MRI were 1.7 ± 1.1 mm/1.5 ± 1.1 mm/5.5 ± 4.2° at implant tip/entry-level/axis. For CBCT, corresponding values were 1.3 ± 0.8 mm/1 ± 0.6 mm/4.5 ± 3.1°. Inter-rater comparisons revealed mean values of 2.2 ± 1.3 mm/1.7 ± 1 mm/7.5 ± 4.9° for MRI, and 1.7 ± 1 mm/1.2 ± 0.7 mm/6 ± 3.7° for CBCT. CBCT-based implant planning was more reproducible than MRI. Nevertheless, more research is needed to increase planning reproducibility—for both modalities—thereby standardizing 3D implant planning. MDPI 2021-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8658654/ /pubmed/34884244 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235546 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Schwindling, Franz Sebastian
Boehm, Sophia
Herpel, Christopher
Kronsteiner, Dorothea
Vogel, Lorenz
Juerchott, Alexander
Heiland, Sabine
Bendszus, Martin
Rammelsberg, Peter
Hilgenfeld, Tim
Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_full Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_fullStr Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_full_unstemmed Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_short Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
title_sort geometric reproducibility of three-dimensional oral implant planning based on magnetic resonance imaging and cone-beam computed tomography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8658654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34884244
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235546
work_keys_str_mv AT schwindlingfranzsebastian geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT boehmsophia geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT herpelchristopher geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT kronsteinerdorothea geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT vogellorenz geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT juerchottalexander geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT heilandsabine geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT bendszusmartin geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT rammelsbergpeter geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT hilgenfeldtim geometricreproducibilityofthreedimensionaloralimplantplanningbasedonmagneticresonanceimagingandconebeamcomputedtomography