We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
International Journal of Oral Implantology



Forgotten password?


Dear readers,

our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.

Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 9 (2016), No. 3     7. Oct. 2016
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 9 (2016), No. 3  (07.10.2016)

Page 301-308, PubMed:27722227

Artefacts of implant-supported single crowns - Impact of material composition on artefact volume on dental MRI
Hilgenfeld, Tim / Prager, Marcel / Schwindling, Franz Sebastian / Heil, Alexander / Kuchenbecker, Stefan / Rammelsberg, Peter / Bendszus, Martin / Heiland, Sabine
Purpose: MRI allows radiation-free imaging of the head and neck area. However, implant-supported prostheses may severely impair image quality due to artefacts. Therefore, identification of preferable material compositions for implants and supported prostheses with little impact on MR image quality is mandatory.
Materials and methods: Overall, one zirconia and four titanium dental implants were provided with different single crown materials: porcelain-fused-to-metal precious alloy (GP-T), porcelain-fused-to-metal non-precious alloy (CCT-T), porcelain-fused-to-zirconia (ZC-T) and monolithic zirconia (Z-T, Z-Z). Three-dimensional artefact volume was determined on a 3 Tesla MRI, applying two standard sequence types (SPACE and TSE). Two-way ANOVA and pair-wise post-hoc Turkey test were performed for comparison of artefact size.
Results: Fewest MR artefacts were observed with zirconia implant combined with monolithic zirconia crown. A titanium implant combined with a single crown framework out of the non-precious alloys was unfavourable in terms of artefact volume. Smaller and comparable artefact volumes were noted for titanium implants with the remaining three crown materials (GP-T, ZC-T and Z-T).
Conclusions: Material composition of dental implants provided with single crowns has a profound impact on artefact volume. In comparison with crowns containing cobalt, chromium and tungsten, the MRI artefacts are reduced in precious alloy- and zirconia-based crowns. Further studies are needed to assess whether residual artefacts allow sufficient diagnostic imaging with these crowns.

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have nothing to disclose.

Keywords: Artefact, dental implant, magnetic resonance imaging, metal, permanent dental restoration, Zirconium oxide
fulltext (no access granted) Endnote-Export