High-resolution MR imaging for dental impressions: a feasibility study

Boldt, Julian; Rottner, Kurt; Schmitter, Marc; Hopfgartner, Andreas; Jakob, Peter M.; Richter, Ernst-Jürgen; Tymofiyeva, Olga

doi:10.1007/s00784-017-2204-1

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tymofiyeva et al (2008) reported an average deviation between dMRI surfaces and impressions of 0.073 and 0.095 mm for two teeth which had been prepared for inlay placement, and of 0.098 and 0.093 mm for two teeth which had been prepared for crowns. Furthermore, Boldt et al (2017) reported an acceptable fit for one fixed dental F I G U R E 4 Sample results for one patient. The tooth surface reconstruction accuracy of CBCT and dMRI was assessed after alignment with stone cast scans (reference).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Tymofiyeva et al () reported an average deviation between dMRI surfaces and impressions of 0.073 and 0.095 mm for two teeth which had been prepared for inlay placement, and of 0.098 and 0.093 mm for two teeth which had been prepared for crowns. Furthermore, Boldt et al () reported an acceptable fit for one fixed dental prosthesis designed by means of a dMRI‐based impression, but did not quantify the geometric accuracy of tooth surface reconstruction. Both studies used an intraoral coil which can produce high‐resolution images (voxel size up to 0.31 × 0.31 × 0.35 mm).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dental MRI-based attempts to image tooth surfaces were made using dMRI-visible splints (Kitamura, Nishimoto, Fujimoto, & Shimada, 2011) or with fluid/solid oral contrast agents filling the complete oral cavity (Boldt et al, 2017;Olt & Jakob, 2004;Traser et al, 2015;Tymofiyeva et al, 2008). However, these previous studies focused on methodology and examined only single cases or case series.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is problematic, because direct visualization of enamel and dentin by use of dMRI is not possible in vivo within MRI acquisition times routinely used in clinical practice (Idiyatullin et al, ). To overcome this limitation, indirect imaging techniques have been proposed which involve filling the oral cavity with blueberry juice (Traser et al, ) or a mixture of agar and gadolinium during the MRI examination (Boldt et al, ). However, the accuracy of tooth surface reconstruction using these methods has not yet been systematically evaluated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

In vivo accuracy of tooth surface reconstruction based on CBCT and dental MRI—A clinical pilot study

Hilgenfeld

Juerchott

Deisenhofer

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Guided implant surgery (GIS) requires alignment of virtual models to reconstructions of three‐dimensional imaging. Accurate visualization of the tooth surfaces in the imaging datasets is mandatory. In this prospective clinical study, in vivo tooth surface accuracy was determined for GIS using cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) and dental magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI). Materials and methods CBCT and 3‐Tesla dMRI were performed in 22 consecutive patients (mean age: 54.4 ± 15.2 years; mean number of restorations per jaw: 6.7 ± 2.7). Altogether, 92 teeth were included (31 incisor, 29 canines, 20 premolars, and 12 molars). Surfaces were reconstructed semi‐automatically and registered to a reference standard (3D scans of stone models made from full‐arch polyether impressions). Reliability of both methods was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. Accuracy was evaluated using the two one‐sided tests procedure with a predefined equivalence margin of ±0.2 mm root mean square (RMS). Results Inter‐ and intrarater reliability of tooth surface reconstruction were comparable for CBCT and dMRI. Geometric deviations were 0.102 ± 0.042 mm RMS for CBCT and 0.261 ± 0.08 mm RMS for dMRI. For a predefined equivalence margin, CBCT and dMRI were statistically equivalent. CBCT, however, was significantly more accurate (p ≤ .0001). For both imaging techniques, accuracy did not differ substantially between different tooth types. Conclusion Cone‐beam computed tomography is an accurate and reliable imaging technique for tooth surfaces in vivo, even in the presence of metal artifacts. In comparison, dMRI in vivo accuracy is lower. Still, it allows for tooth surface reconstruction in satisfactory detail and within acceptable acquisition times.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

In vivo accuracy of tooth surface reconstruction based on CBCT and dental MRI—A clinical pilot study

Hilgenfeld

Juerchott

Deisenhofer

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The imaging techniques used in dentistry include digital panoramic radiography (orthopantomography), single-tooth radiography, bitewing X-ray, digital volume tomography (DVT), as well as computed tomography (CT) of the head, magnetic resonance imaging of the temporomandibular joints, and recently magnetic resonance imaging (dental MRI) [1][2][3]. Dental imaging comprises approximately 40 % of radiography examinations performed in Germany.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unexpected metallic foreign bodies on panoramic scans – a narrative review

Brauer¹,

Bartols

Hellmann

et al. 2023

Rofo

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The digital panoramic radiograph (orthopantomogram, OPG) is the standard radiographic technique for basic diagnostics in dental practice. A correctly taken image provides a good overview of teeth and jaw, whereas radiopaque foreign materials, e. g. metal, can obscure relevant findings. Methods A literature review on unexpected metallic foreign bodies in OPG was performed to determine the spectrum of metallic foreign bodies that may cause radiopaque areas on panoramic radiographs in routine clinical use. Results and Conclusion A total of 37 different unexpected metallic foreign bodies were found. They can be categorized as jewelry, clothing, personal protective equipment, medical devices, iatrogenic foreign bodies, and rare incidental findings. Radiopaque foreign materials in the OPG are often relatively easy to recognize as artifacts because of their location, and they are avoidable in most cases. If unclear, a three-dimensional radiograph was helpful for determining the location. Radiopaque areas caused by foreign bodies can lead to misinterpretation or partial or complete non-evaluability and should therefore be avoided. Key Points: Citation Format

show abstract