ArticleClinical oral investigations2020
In vivo reliability of 3D cephalometric landmark determination on magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast high-resolution dental MRI using a disposable wireless intraoral coil: From concept to reality.Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) · 2026Article
- Can MRI be a potential substitute for CT in cephalometric analysis for radiation-free diagnoses?Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026Article
- Reliability of dental-dedicated magnetic resonance imaging for 2-dimensional orthodontic diagnosis: A pilot study of landmark identification.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Intraoral Coil Arrays for Single-Tooth Dental MRI.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- The Effect of 1.5 Tesla MRI on Microleakage and Thermal Stability of Stainless Steel and Titanium Orthodontic Brackets: AnJournal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2025Article
- MRI-based cephalometrics: a scoping review of current insights and future perspectives.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023Article
- Dental MRI-only a future vision or standard of care? A literature review on current indications and applications of MRI in dentistry.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023Review
- "3D Counterpart Analysis": A Novel Method for Enlow's Counterpart Analysis on CBCT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Reliability and accuracy of dental MRI for measuring root canal length of incisors and canines: a clinical pilot study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Implant-to-nasal floor dimensions projected by panoramic radiographs in the maxillary incisor-canine region: implications for dental implant treatment.Odontology · 2022Article
- Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging artifacts caused by fixed orthodontic CAD/CAM retainers-an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Article
- MRI for the display of autologous onlay bone grafts during early healing-an experimental study.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2021Article
- Relationship between vertical facial pattern and brain structure and shape.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Article
- Three-Dimensional Evaluation of Maxillary Sinus Changes in Growing Subjects: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objective3D cephalometric analysis performed on cone-beam or multi-slice computed tomography (CBCT, MSCT) has superior diagnostic value compared to 2D cephalometry based on radiographs. However, this comes at the expense of increased radiation risks for the predominantly young patients. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to overcome this diagnostic dilemma but has not been established for 3D cephalometry so far. Since landmark reliability forms the basis for 3D cephalometry, we evaluated the in vivo reliability of established 3D landmarks using MRI. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixteen orthodontic patients underwent MRI at 3 Tesla using a 0.5 mm 3D sequence. On each MRI scan, 44 cephalometric landmarks were determined. Image analysis was performed twice by two independent observers. Intra- and inter-rater agreement was assessed by mean measurement errors and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Measurement errors were calculated as Euclidean distances and distances for x-, y-, and z-coordinates.
resultsOverall, MRI-based 3D cephalometric landmarks revealed a high reliability comparable to prior in vivo studies using CBCT/MSCT. Intra- and inter-rater ICCs were consistently higher than 0.9. Intra-rater comparisons showed mean measurement differences (ranges) of 0.87 mm (0.41-1.63) for rater I and 0.94 mm (0.49-1.28) for rater II. Average inter-rater difference was 1.10 mm (0.52-2.29). Distinct differences in reliability between the various landmarks were observed, corresponding well with the landmarks' specific shapes.
conclusionsThe present study demonstrates that MRI enables reliable determination of 3D cephalometric landmarks in vivo. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study emphasizes the potential of MRI to perform treatment planning and monitoring in orthodontics as well as oral and maxillofacial surgery without radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31352517What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.