Editorial
Volume 6 Issue 1
Niveditha S Prasad* and Sarath Raj VS
June 08, 2025
DOI : 10.56831/PSSRP-06-193
Abstract
The integration of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) into dental implantology has significantly enhanced the precision of surgical planning. However, the associated ionizing radiation poses potential health risks, necessitating exploration of alternative imaging modalities. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), known for its non-ionizing nature, presents a promising option for implant planning, potentially reducing radiation exposure without compromising diagnostic accuracy.
The Radiation Challenge in Implant Planning
CBCT has become a cornerstone in implant dentistry due to its ability to provide detailed three-dimensional images of the dental and skeletal structures. Despite its advantages, CBCT involves radiation doses that are considerably higher than conventional dental radiographs. For instance, the effective dose from a CBCT scan can range from 60 to 151 µSv, depending on the field of view, whereas a full-mouth radiograph with phosphor storage plates can deliver an effective dose of approximately 34.9 µSv. Repeated exposure to such radiation, especially in younger patients, raises concerns about the cumulative risk of radiation-induced conditions.
MRI: A Non-Ionizing Alternative
MRI offers a significant advantage by eliminating ionizing radiation, making it an attractive alternative for dental imaging. Recent studies have demonstrated that MRI can provide high-resolution images suitable for implant planning. For example, a prospective study utilizing a 3T MRI protocol achieved mean three-dimensional deviations of 1.1 mm at the entry point and 1.3 mm at the apex, with an angular deviation of 2.4°, indicating a high degree of accuracy comparable to CBCT-based planning. MRI's superior soft tissue contrast allows for detailed visualization of surrounding anatomical structures, such as nerves and blood vessels, which are crucial for safe implant placement. This capability can enhance the comprehensive assessment of the implant site, potentially leading to better surgical outcomes.
Clinical Considerations and Limitations
Despite its advantages, the adoption of MRI in implant planning is not without challenges. Motion artifacts can degrade image quality, and the longer acquisition times may be less convenient for patients compared to the relatively quick CBCT scans. Additionally, the availability of high-field MRI machines equipped with dedicated dental coils may be limited, potentially increasing the cost and reducing accessibility. Moreover, while MRI provides excellent soft tissue contrast, its ability to delineate bone structures is inferior to that of CBCT. This limitation may affect the assessment of bone density and volume, which are critical factors in implant planning. Therefore, a hybrid approach, combining MRI for soft tissue visualization and CBCT for bone assessment, may offer a balanced solution, leveraging the strengths of both modalities.
Conclusion
The potential of MRI to serve as a radiation-free alternative to CBCT in dental implant planning is promising. While challenges such as motion artifacts and limited bone visualization exist, ongoing advancements in MRI technology and imaging protocols are likely to mitigate these issues. Incorporating MRI into implant planning protocols, particularly in cases where radiation exposure is a concern, aligns with the principles of patient safety and personalized care. Future research and clinical trials will be pivotal in establishing standardized MRI protocols and determining their efficacy across diverse patient populations.