{"title":"在无辐射诊断中，MRI能否成为CT的潜在替代品？","authors":"Nalla Maheswara Rao, Navadeep Kaur, Shailendra Singh Rana, Abhishek Gupta, Sharvari Vichare, Anjana Rajagopalan, J Sivaraman, Kunal Pal, Bala Chakravarthy Neelapu","doi":"10.1007/s00056-025-00576-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) usage over computed tomography (CT) to perform three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric analyses. The secondary objective is to find intra- and interobserver reliability of manual cephalometric landmarks identification in both CT and MRI scan data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 40 patients were used in this study, with orthodontists manually identifying 37 landmarks on both CT and MRI scans. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated individually for both CT and MRI scan data to find intra- and interobserver reliability. In addition to ICC, paired t‑test and mean error were also calculated. Ground truth landmarks were calculated by considering the mean values of manually located 37 landmarks by observers for both CT and MRI. Thirty-seven cephalometric measurements (29 linear, 6 angular, and 2 ratios) were measured using 37 ground truth landmarks. Mean error (ME) between CT and MRI measurements was calculated and paired t‑test was performed to find the reliability of MRI usage over CT. Bland-Altman analysis was also performed on the measurements to check the agreement between CT and MRI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intra- and interobserver reliability was found to be reliable (ICC > 0.98, and P > 0.05) for all 37 landmarks in both CT and MRI. The ME for linear measurements was found to be 1.81 mm for hard tissue, 1.72 mm for soft tissue, and 1.53° for hard tissue angular measurements between CT and MRI. The paired t‑test performed on measurements between CT and MRI proved to be statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). The Bland-Altman analysis also showed strong agreement and low systemic bias between CT and MRI data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strong ICC and P values shows the high reliability and reproducibility of manual landmark identification on both CT and MRI. The ME for the linear and angular measurements between CT and MRI was found to be well within acceptable limits. The results of paired t‑test and Bland-Altman analyses for cephalometric measurements between CT and MRI has shown strong evidence supporting the use of MRI as a substitute for CT.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can MRI be a potential substitute for CT in cephalometric analysis for radiation-free diagnoses?\",\"authors\":\"Nalla Maheswara Rao, Navadeep Kaur, Shailendra Singh Rana, Abhishek Gupta, Sharvari Vichare, Anjana Rajagopalan, J Sivaraman, Kunal Pal, Bala Chakravarthy Neelapu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00056-025-00576-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) usage over computed tomography (CT) to perform three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric analyses. The secondary objective is to find intra- and interobserver reliability of manual cephalometric landmarks identification in both CT and MRI scan data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 40 patients were used in this study, with orthodontists manually identifying 37 landmarks on both CT and MRI scans. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated individually for both CT and MRI scan data to find intra- and interobserver reliability. In addition to ICC, paired t‑test and mean error were also calculated. Ground truth landmarks were calculated by considering the mean values of manually located 37 landmarks by observers for both CT and MRI. Thirty-seven cephalometric measurements (29 linear, 6 angular, and 2 ratios) were measured using 37 ground truth landmarks. Mean error (ME) between CT and MRI measurements was calculated and paired t‑test was performed to find the reliability of MRI usage over CT. Bland-Altman analysis was also performed on the measurements to check the agreement between CT and MRI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intra- and interobserver reliability was found to be reliable (ICC > 0.98, and P > 0.05) for all 37 landmarks in both CT and MRI. The ME for linear measurements was found to be 1.81 mm for hard tissue, 1.72 mm for soft tissue, and 1.53° for hard tissue angular measurements between CT and MRI. The paired t‑test performed on measurements between CT and MRI proved to be statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). The Bland-Altman analysis also showed strong agreement and low systemic bias between CT and MRI data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strong ICC and P values shows the high reliability and reproducibility of manual landmark identification on both CT and MRI. The ME for the linear and angular measurements between CT and MRI was found to be well within acceptable limits. The results of paired t‑test and Bland-Altman analyses for cephalometric measurements between CT and MRI has shown strong evidence supporting the use of MRI as a substitute for CT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-025-00576-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-025-00576-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can MRI be a potential substitute for CT in cephalometric analysis for radiation-free diagnoses?
Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) usage over computed tomography (CT) to perform three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric analyses. The secondary objective is to find intra- and interobserver reliability of manual cephalometric landmarks identification in both CT and MRI scan data.
Methods: Data from 40 patients were used in this study, with orthodontists manually identifying 37 landmarks on both CT and MRI scans. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated individually for both CT and MRI scan data to find intra- and interobserver reliability. In addition to ICC, paired t‑test and mean error were also calculated. Ground truth landmarks were calculated by considering the mean values of manually located 37 landmarks by observers for both CT and MRI. Thirty-seven cephalometric measurements (29 linear, 6 angular, and 2 ratios) were measured using 37 ground truth landmarks. Mean error (ME) between CT and MRI measurements was calculated and paired t‑test was performed to find the reliability of MRI usage over CT. Bland-Altman analysis was also performed on the measurements to check the agreement between CT and MRI.
Results: The intra- and interobserver reliability was found to be reliable (ICC > 0.98, and P > 0.05) for all 37 landmarks in both CT and MRI. The ME for linear measurements was found to be 1.81 mm for hard tissue, 1.72 mm for soft tissue, and 1.53° for hard tissue angular measurements between CT and MRI. The paired t‑test performed on measurements between CT and MRI proved to be statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). The Bland-Altman analysis also showed strong agreement and low systemic bias between CT and MRI data.
Conclusions: The strong ICC and P values shows the high reliability and reproducibility of manual landmark identification on both CT and MRI. The ME for the linear and angular measurements between CT and MRI was found to be well within acceptable limits. The results of paired t‑test and Bland-Altman analyses for cephalometric measurements between CT and MRI has shown strong evidence supporting the use of MRI as a substitute for CT.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
