Volume 31, Issue S20 p. 101
ABSTRACTS
Free Access

Influence of dental implant material and geometry on the MRI artifacts pattern

Lauren Oliveira Lima Bohner

Lauren Oliveira Lima Bohner

Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Johannes Kleinheinz

Johannes Kleinheinz

Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Marcel Hanisch

Marcel Hanisch

Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 05 October 2020
Citations: 1

7OWH2 ePOSTER BASIC RESEARCH

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is affected by dental implant artifacts. However, it is still uncertain whether dental implant material and geometry influence the artifacts pattern around dental implants.

Aim/Hypothesis: To evaluate how MRI artifacts pattern is affected by the geometry (diameter and height) of titanium and zirconia dental implants.

Materials and Methods: Titanium (Titan SLA, Straumann) and zirconia (Pure Ceramic Implant, Straumann) dental implants with different height (8 mm and 14 mm) and diameters (3.3 mm and 4.1 mm) were used in this study. Porcine bone samples containing dental implants (n = 9) were scanned using a whole-body 3T MRI system (Philips, Healthcare System) and 8-channel SENSE Foot Ankle coil. T1-weighted turbo spin echo sequence was used with TR/TE 25/3.5 ms, voxel size 0.22 × 0.22 × 0.50 mm, scan time 11:18. As control group, the implant bed preparation without dental implants was scanned with a μ-computed tomography (μCT) device (80 kV, 125 mA, voxel size 16 μm). Measurements were performed at sectional planes (coronal, sagittal and longitudinal) determined on the middle-center of dental implant bed preparation. Artifacts distribution was defined as the mean distance (mm) between dental implant preparation surface and artifact borders. Statistical analysis was performed with Within-ANOVA and post hoc tests ( 0.05).

Results: Mean artifacts distribution was 2.57 ± 1.09 mm for titanium dental implants and 0.37 ± 0.20 mm for zirconia dental implants (< 0.05). No statistical significant difference was found among different sectional planes (= 0.73). Implant geometry did not influence artifacts pattern (= 0.43).

Conclusions and Clinical Implications: Artifacts were higher for Titanium than Zirconia implants, and dental implant geometry did not affect MRI-artifacts pattern.

Acknowledgements: The authors express their gratitude to Straumann (Basel, Switzerland) for providing support with the materials used on this study.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging, Dental implants

    The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.