Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and cone-beam computed tomography for maxillary sinus graft assessment

  • Received : 2019.09.07
  • Accepted : 2020.02.13
  • Published : 2020.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Little is known regarding the accuracy of clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols with acceptable scan times in sinus graft assessment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations between MRI and cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) measurements of maxillary sinus grafts using 2 different clinical MRI imaging protocols. Materials and Methods: A total of 15 patients who underwent unilateral sinus lift surgery with biphasic calcium phosphate were included in this study. CBCT, T1-weighted MRI, and T2-weighted MRI scans were taken 6 months after sinus lift surgery. Linear measurements of the maximum height and buccolingual width in coronal images, as well as the maximum anteroposterior depth in sagittal images, were performed by 2 trained observers using CBCT and MRI Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine files. Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) was also performed to confirm the presence of bone tissue in the grafted area. Correlations between MRI and CBCT measurements were assessed with the Pearson test. Results: Significant correlations between CBCT and MRI were found for sinus graft height (T1-weighted, r=0.711 and P<0.05; T2-weighted, r=0.713 and P<0.05), buccolingual width (T1-weighted, r=0.892 and P<0.05; T2-weighted, r=0.956 and P<0.05), and anteroposterior depth (T1-weighted, r=0.731 and P<0.05; T2-weighted, r=0.873 and P<0.05). The presence of bone tissue in the grafted areas was confirmed via micro-CT. Conclusion: Both MRI pulse sequences tested can be used for sinus graft measurements, as strong correlations with CBCT were found. However, correlations between T2-weighted MRI and CBCT were slightly higher than those between T1-weighted MRI and CBCT.

Keywords

References

  1. Sekine H, Taguchi T, Seta S, Takano M, Takeda T, Kakizawa T. Dental implant treatment with different techniques for sinus floor elevation - a case report. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 2007; 48: 87-91. https://doi.org/10.2209/tdcpublication.48.87
  2. Lee KS, Kwon YH, Herr Y, Shin SI, Lee JY, Chung JH. Incomplete bone formation after sinus augmentation: a case report on radiological findings by computerized tomography at follow-up. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2010; 40: 283-8. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2010.40.6.283
  3. Cortes AR, Cortes DN, Arita ES. Effectiveness of piezoelectric surgery in preparing the lateral window for maxillary sinus augmentation in patients with sinus anatomical variations: a case series. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 1211-5.
  4. Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986; 30: 207-29.
  5. Chanavaz M. Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology - eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). J Oral Implantol 1990; 16: 199-209.
  6. Ulm CW, Solar P, Krennmair G, Matejka M, Watzek G. Incidence and suggested surgical management of septa in sinus-lift procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995; 10: 462-5.
  7. Khoury F. Augmentation of the sinus floor with mandibular bone block and simultaneous implantation: a 6-year clinical investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14: 557-64.
  8. Cortes AR, Ferraz P, Tosta M. Influence of etiologic factors in peri-implantitis: literature review and case report. J Oral Implantol 2012; 38: 633-7. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00139
  9. Tosta M, Cortes AR, Correa L, Pinto DdoS S Jr, Tumenas I, Katchburian E. Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of a synthetic bone substitute for maxillary sinus grafting in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24: 866-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02384.x
  10. Wallace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol 2003; 8: 328-43. https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.328
  11. Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R. Systematic review of survival rates for implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004; 24: 565-77.
  12. Spin-Neto R, Wenzel A. Patient movement and motion artefacts in cone beam computed tomography of the dentomaxillofacial region: a systematic literature review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2016; 121: 425-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2015.11.019
  13. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006; 72: 75-80.
  14. Mossa-Basha M, Blitz AM. Imaging of the paranasal sinuses. Semin Roentgenol 2013; 48: 14-34. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ro.2012.09.006
  15. Aguiar MF, Marques AP, Carvalho AC, Cavalcanti MG. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging compared with computed tomography for implant planning. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 362-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01490.x
  16. Bracher AK, Hofmann C, Bornstedt A, Hell E, Janke F, Ulrici J, et al. Ultrashort echo time (UTE) MRI for the assessment of caries lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20120321. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20120321
  17. Nagamatsu-Sakaguchi C, Maekawa K, Ono T, Yanagi Y, Minakuchi H, Miyawaki S, et al. Test-retest reliability of MRIbased disk position diagnosis of the temporomandibular joint. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16: 101-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0476-9
  18. Senel FC, Duran S, Icten O, Izbudak I, Cizmeci F. Assessment of the sinus lift operation by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 44: 511-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2006.02.004
  19. Terra GT, Oliveira JX, Hernandez A, Lourenco SV, Arita ES, Cortes AR. Diffusion-weighted MRI for differentiation between sialadenitis and pleomorphic adenoma. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160257. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160257
  20. Cortes AR, Cohen O, Zhao M, Aoki EM, Ribeiro RA, Abu Nada L, et al. Assessment of alveolar bone marrow fat content using 15 T MRI. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2018; 125: 244-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2017.11.016
  21. Cortes AR, Abdala-Junior R, Weber M, Arita ES, Ackerman JL. Influence of pulse sequence parameters at 1.5 T and 3.0 T on MRI artefacts produced by metal-ceramic restorations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20150136. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20150136
  22. Cortes AR, Eimar H, Barbosa Jde S, Costa C, Arita ES, Tamimi F. Sensitivity and specificity of radiographic methods for predicting insertion torque of dental implants. J Periodontol 2015; 86: 646-55. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.140584
  23. Cortes AR, Pinheiro LR, Cavalcanti MG, Arita ES, Tamimi F. Sinus floor bone failures in maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a case-control study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17: 335-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12113
  24. Arita ES, Pippa MG, Marcucci M, Cardoso R, Cortes AR, Watanabe PC, et al. Assessment of osteoporotic alterations in achondroplastic patients: a case series. Clin Rheumatol 2013; 32: 399-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-012-2126-x
  25. Nishimura DA, Aoki EM, Abdala Junior R, Arita ES, Pinhata-Baptista OH, Tateno RY, et al. Comparison of pixel values of maxillary sinus grafts and adjacent native bone with conebeam computed tomography. Implant Dent 2018; 27: 667-71. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000823
  26. Gray CF, Staff RT, Redpath TW, Needham G, Renny NM. Assessment of maxillary sinus volume for the sinus lift operation by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2000; 29: 154-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600518

Cited by

  1. An Update of the Possible Applications of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in Dentistry: A Literature Review vol.7, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging7050075