Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41175450›Full record

Observational studyInternational dental journal2026

Evaluation of 5T Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Oral Cavity: An Observational Cross-Sectional Study Compared With 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone Beam Computed Tomography.

Yiting Cao, Zhengnan Qi, Yiwei Wang, Tingting Wang, Zhiwei Qin, Peirong Zhang, Yang Tian, Dengbin Wang, Zisheng Tang

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in International dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Yiting CaoDepartment of Stomatology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhengnan QiDepartment of Stomatology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yiwei WangDepartment of Stomatology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Tingting WangDepartment of 2nd Dental Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhiwei QinMR Research Collaboration, Shanghai United Imaging Healthcare Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Peirong ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yang TianShanghai Key Laboratory of Green Chemistry and Chemical Processes, Department of Chemistry, School of Chemistry and Molecular Engineering, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: ytian@chem.ecnu.edu.cn.
Dengbin WangDepartment of Radiology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: wangdengbin@xinhuamed.com.cn.
Zisheng TangDepartment of Stomatology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: tangzisheng163@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

aimsThe advantages of 5T have been revealed in many clinical applications, there is a lack of research in the oral cavity. This paper is the first to investigate the imaging effect of 5T MRI on tissue structures in the oral cavity, and to compare it with 3T MRI and CBCT.

methodsEighteen healthy volunteers (12 females, mean age 28.58 ± 3.12 years; 6 males, mean age 30.67 ± 8.33 years) participated in this study. Four imaging sequences, T1-weighted (T1W), T1-weighted fat-saturated (T1W-FS), T2-weighted fat-saturated (T2W-FS) and proton density-weighted fat-saturated (PDW-FS) sequences were scanned on 5T and 3T MRI for comparison. Two blinded independent observers performed qualitative comparisons between 5T MRI, 3T MRI and CBCT using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative comparisons between 5T MRI and 3T MRI were performed using the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast ratio (CNR), and the scan times of 5T MRI and 3T MRI were also compared. The 4 sequences on 5T were compared to identify the optimal scanning protocol for different tissue structures. The intraclass coefficients (ICCs), nonparametric tests including Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Friedman test and the pairwise Games-Howell posthoc test were carried out. The Shapiro-Wilk test and the paired t-test were also performed. A P value <.05 indicated a significant difference.

resultsThe inter-observer and intraobserver agreements of image quality assessment were substantial to excellent (ICCs = 0.654-1.000, P < .05). 5T had significantly higher qualitative ratings, SNR and CNR than 3T in all structures (all P < .05). 5T achieved results close to CBCT, while the T2W-FS sequence exceeded CBCT in contrast (4.53 ± 0.46 vs 4.22 ± 0.38, P < .05), periodontium (4.47 ± 0.46 vs 4.04 ± 0.57, P < .05), gingiva (3.89 ± 0.36 vs 1.00 ± 0.00, P < .001) and maxillary sinus (4.31 ± 0.48 vs 4.04 ± 0.43, P < .05) scores.

conclusionThis study found 5T MRI can provide high-quality imaging of oral tissue structures in in-vivo applications, serving as a radiation-free and accurate dental examination tool. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates the feasibility of 5T MRI for oral tissue imaging. The development of this technology has many potential applications in areas such as the detection and diagnosis of dental diseases, and can serve as a powerful complement to existing testing techniques.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMouthAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleSignal-To-Noise RatioCone beam computed tomographyImage qualityMagnetic resonance imagingOral cavity

Identifiers

PMID41175450
PMCPMC12621437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.