ArticleClinical oral investigations2022
Endodontic working length measurements of premolars and molars in high-resolution dental MRI: a clinical pilot study for assessment of reliability and accuracy.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Dental Pulp Assessment: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- Detection of caries lesions using a water-sensitive STIR sequence in dental MRI.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Visualization of clinically silent, odontogenic maxillary sinus mucositis originating from periapical inflammation using MRI: a feasibility study.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- SEMAC + VAT for Suppression of Artifacts Induced by Dental-Implant-Supported Restorations in Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo prospectively assess the reliability and accuracy of high-resolution, dental MRI (dMRI) for endodontic working length (WL) measurements of premolars and molars under clinical conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree-Tesla dMRI was performed in 9 subjects who also had undergone cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) (mean age: 47 ± 13.5 years). A total of 34 root canals from 12 molars (4/8, upper/lower jaw; 22 root canals) and 11 premolars (2/9 upper/lower jaw; 12 root canals) were included. CBCT and dMRI datasets were reconstructed to visualize the root canal in one single slice. Subsequently, two radiologists measured the root canal lengths in both modalities twice in blinded fashion. Reliability and accuracy for both modalities were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analysis, respectively.
resultsReliability (intra-rater I/II; inter-rater) of dental MRI measurements was excellent and comparable to CBCT for premolars (0.993/0.900; 0.958 vs. 0.993/0.956; 0.951) and for molars (0.978/0.995; 0.986 vs. 0.992/0.996; 0.989). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a mean underestimation/bias (95% confidence interval) of dMRI measurements of 0.8 (- 1.44/3.05) mm for premolars and 0.4 (- 1.55/2.39) mm for molars. In up to 59% of the cases, the accuracy of dMRI for WL measurements was within the underestimation margin of 0 to 2 mm short of the apical foramen AF.
conclusionsIn vivo demonstration and measurement of WL are feasible using dMRI. The reliability of measurements is high and equivalent to CBCT. Nonetheless, due to lower spatial resolution and longer acquisition time, the accuracy of dMRI is inferior to CBCT, impeding its current use for clinical treatment planning. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: dMRI is a promising radiation-free imaging technique. Its reliability for endodontic working length measurements is high, but its accuracy is not satisfactory enough yet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.