» Articles » PMID: 31802215

In Vivo Comparison of MRI- and CBCT-based 3D Cephalometric Analysis: Beginning of a Non-ionizing Diagnostic Era in Craniomaxillofacial Imaging?

Overview
Journal Eur Radiol
Specialty Radiology
Date 2019 Dec 6
PMID 31802215
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can serve as an alternative diagnostic tool to the "gold standard" cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in 3D cephalometric analysis.

Methods: In this prospective feasibility study, 12 patients (8 males, 4 females; mean age ± SD, 26.1 years ± 6.6) underwent 3D MRI and CBCT before orthognathic surgery. 3D cephalometric analysis was performed twice by two independent observers on both modalities. For each dataset, 27 cephalometric landmarks were defined from which 35 measurements (17 angles, 18 distances) were calculated. Statistical analyses included the calculation of Euclidean distances, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland-Altman analysis, and equivalence testing (linear mixed effects model) with a predefined equivalence margin of ± 1°/1 mm.

Results: Analysis of reliability for CBCT vs. MRI (intra-rater I/intra-rater II/inter-rater) revealed Euclidean distances of 0.86/0.86/0.98 mm vs. 0.93/0.99/1.10 mm for landmarks, ICCs of 0.990/0.980/0.986 vs. 0.982/0.978/0.980 for angles, and ICCs of 0.992/0.988/0.989 vs. 0.991/0.985/0.988 for distances. Bland-Altman analysis showed high levels of agreement between CBCT and MRI with bias values (95% levels of agreement) of 0.03° (- 1.49; 1.54) for angles and 0.02 mm (- 1.44; 1.47) for distances. In the linear mixed effects model, the mean values of CBCT and MRI measurements were equivalent.

Conclusion: This feasibility study indicates that MRI enables reliable 3D cephalometric analysis with excellent agreement to corresponding measurements on CBCT. Thus, MRI could serve as a non-ionizing alternative to CBCT for treatment planning and monitoring in orthodontics as well as oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Key Points: • Clinically established 3D cephalometric measurements performed on MRI are highly reliable and show an excellent agreement with CBCT (gold standard). • The MRI technique applied in this study could be used as a non-ionizing diagnostic tool in orthodontics as well as oral and maxillofacial surgery. • Since most patients benefiting from 3D cephalometry are young in age, the use of MRI could substantially contribute to radiation protection and open up new possibilities for treatment monitoring.

Citing Articles

Three-dimensional localization of tooth germs without ionizing radiation : Proof-of-concept study using magnetic resonance imaging.

Detterbeck A, Huber T, Schmid M J Orofac Orthop. 2025; .

PMID: 39915289 DOI: 10.1007/s00056-024-00575-6.


Periapical bone edema volume in 3D MRI is positively correlated with bone architecture changes.

Marka A, Probst M, Greve T, Lenhart N, Graf N, Probst F Insights Imaging. 2025; 16(1):26.

PMID: 39881100 PMC: 11780240. DOI: 10.1186/s13244-025-01903-z.


Feasibility of 3 Tesla MRI for the assessment of mid-palatal suture maturation: a retrospective pilot study.

Willershausen I, Kopp M, Scholz M, Strobel A, Seidel C, Paulsen F Odontology. 2024; 113(1):390-397.

PMID: 38758257 PMC: 11717790. DOI: 10.1007/s10266-024-00950-0.


Reliability of landmark identification for analysis of the temporomandibular joint in real-time MRI.

Mouchoux J, Meyer-Marcotty P, Sojka F, Dechent P, Klenke D, Wiechens B Head Face Med. 2024; 20(1):10.

PMID: 38365709 PMC: 10874088. DOI: 10.1186/s13005-024-00411-7.


Detection of caries lesions using a water-sensitive STIR sequence in dental MRI.

Burian E, Lenhart N, Greve T, Bodden J, Burian G, Palla B Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):663.

PMID: 38182726 PMC: 10770403. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-51151-2.


References
1.
Goske M, Applegate K, Boylan J, Butler P, Callahan M, Coley B . The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190(2):273-4. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.3526. View

2.
MOYERS R, Bookstein F . The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics. Am J Orthod. 1979; 75(6):599-617. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(79)90093-9. View

3.
Juerchott A, Saleem M, Hilgenfeld T, Freudlsperger C, Zingler S, Lux C . 3D cephalometric analysis using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: validation of accuracy and reproducibility. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):13029. PMC: 6115428. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-31384-8. View

4.
Kim H, Kim G, Kim S, Lee J, Kim E, Kwon Y . Three-dimensional evaluation of the pharyngeal airway using cone-beam computed tomography following bimaxillary orthognathic surgery in skeletal class III patients. Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 20(5):915-22. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1575-4. View

5.
Brown A, Scarfe W, Scheetz J, Silveira A, Farman A . Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3D images. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79(1):150-7. DOI: 10.2319/122407-599.1. View