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

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 5546
Author(s):  
Franz Schwindling ◽  
Sophia Boehm ◽  
Christopher Herpel ◽  
Dorothea Kronsteiner ◽  
Lorenz Vogel ◽  
...  

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.

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 90 ◽  
Author(s):  
AntonioneSantos Bezerra Pinto ◽  
MatheusSantos Carvalho ◽  
AlanLeandro Carvalho de Farias ◽  
Brunna da Silva Firmino ◽  
LuisPaulo da Silva Dias ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Talita Micheletti Helfer ◽  
Alberto Borges Peixoto ◽  
Gabriele Tonni ◽  
Edward Araujo Júnior

Craniosynostosis is defined as the process of premature fusion of one or more of the cranial sutures.  It is a common condition that occurs in about 1 to 2,000 live births. Craniosynostosis may be classified in primary or secondary. It is also classified as nonsyndromic or syndromic. According to suture commitment, craniosynostosis may affect a single suture or multiple sutures. There is a wide range of syndromes involving craniosynostosis and the most common are Apert, Pffeifer, Crouzon, Shaethre-Chotzen and Muenke syndromes. The underlying etiology of nonsyndromic craniosynostosis is unknown. Mutations in the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signalling pathway play a crucial role in the etiology of craniosynostosis syndromes. Prenatal ultrasound`s detection rate of craniosynostosis is low. Nowadays, different methods can be applied for prenatal diagnosis of craniosynostosis, such as two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) scan and, finally, molecular diagnosis. The presence of craniosynostosis may affect the birthing process. Fetuses with craniosynostosis also have higher rates of perinatal complications. In order to avoid the risks of untreated craniosynostosis, children are usually treated surgically soon after postnatal diagnosis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Fernando Antonio Reis Laurino ◽  
Isabela Goulart Gil Choi ◽  
Jun Ho Kim ◽  
Ivan Onone Gialain ◽  
Renato Ferraço ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 316-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed A.Q. Al-Saleh ◽  
Kumaradevan Punithakumar ◽  
Jacob L. Jaremko ◽  
Noura A. Alsufyani ◽  
Pierre Boulanger ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 992-999
Author(s):  
Ricardo Miguel Costa de Freitas ◽  
Celi Santos Andrade ◽  
José Guilherme Mendes Pereira Caldas ◽  
Alexandre Fligelman Kanas ◽  
Richard Halti Cabral ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 197140092110177
Author(s):  
Alessandro Cannavale ◽  
Piergiorgio Nardis ◽  
Pierleone Lucatelli ◽  
Mario Corona ◽  
Mariangela Santoni ◽  
...  

Background and purpose Percutaneous spine biopsies for spondylodiscitis have been long discussed due to the low microbiologic yield. This retrospective study evaluated factors of cone beam computed tomography-guided spine biopsies that may affect microbiologic yield. Methods We retrospectively reviewed percutaneous spine biopsies under cone beam computed tomography for spondylodiscitis performed from January 2015–December 2020. Clinical and technical features such as the time from initial symptoms to biopsy, level biopsied, biopsy needle type/gauge, technical approach, radiation dose, technical success and microbiologic yield were recorded. Pre-procedure magnetic resonance imaging findings were also recorded such as the number of vertebral bodies involved, and disc morphology. Univariate logistic regression analysis and Receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed to assess any relationship between relevant factors and positive cultures. Results A total of 50 patients underwent cone beam computed tomography-guided biopsies for spondylodiscitis, with resulted positive cultures in 18 patients (36%). The mean time from the initial referral of spinal symptoms to procedure in the positive culture group was the most influential finding for positive cultures (odds ratio 56.3, p < 0.001). Among magnetic resonance imaging findings, thin or degenerated intervertebral disc was a negative factor for positive cultures (odds ratio 0.09, p = 0.006). Univariate analysis showed that percutaneous approach (transpedicular vs posterolateral/interlaminar) needle size (11–13 g vs 16–18G, odds ratio 1.2, p = 0.7) and site of biopsy (disc vs bone vs disc plus endplate) did not significantly affect the microbiologic yield of spine biopsy. Conclusion Percutaneous cone beam computed tomography-guided biopsy for spondylodiscitis is a reliable and safe technique and its microbiologic yield may increase if biopsy is performed within the acute phase of infection.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document