Geometric accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging<scp>–</scp>derived virtual <scp>3‐dimensional</scp> bone surface models of the mandible in comparison to computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography<scp>:</scp> A porcine cadaver study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Providing accurate 3-dimensional virtual bone surface models is a prerequisite for virtual surgical planning and additive manufacturing in craniomaxillofacial surgery. For this purpose, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be a radiation-free alternative to computed tomography (CT) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the geometric accuracy of 3-dimensional T1-weighted MRI-derived virtual bone surface models of the mandible in comparison to CT and CBCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Specimens of the mandible from porcine cadavers were scanned with (1) a 3-dimensional T1-weighted MRI sequence (0.6 mm isotropic voxel) optimized for bone imaging, (2) CT, and (3) CBCT. Cortical mandibular structures (n = 10) were segmented using semiautomated and manual techniques. Imaging-based virtual 3-dimensional models were aligned with a high-resolution optical 3-dimensional surface scan of the dissected bone (=ground truth) and global geometric deviations were calculated (mean surface distance [MSD]/root-mean-square distance [RMSD]). Agreement between the imaging modalities was assessed by equivalence testing and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Intra- and inter-rater agreement was on a high level for all modalities. Global geometric deviations (MSD/RMSD) between optical scans and imaging modalities were 0.225 ± 0.020 mm/0.345 ± 0.074 mm for CT, 0.280 ± 0.067 mm/0.371 ± 0.074 mm for MRI, and 0.352 ± 0.076 mm/0.454 ± 0.071 mm for CBCT. All imaging modalities were statistically equivalent within an equivalence margin of ±0.3 mm, and Bland-Altman analysis indicated high agreement as well. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that the accuracy and reliability of MRI-derived virtual 3-dimensional bone surface models is equal to CT and CBCT. MRI may be considered as a reliable alternative to CT and CBCT in computer-assisted craniomaxillofacial surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".