JaLCDOI 10.18926/AMO/30760
FullText URL fulltext.pdf
Author Ohkawa, Motoomi| Tanabe, Masatada| Toyama, Yoshihiro| Kimura, Naruhide| Uematsu, Koji| Satoh, Gen|
Abstract <p>The findings of three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) and two-dimensional computed tomography (2DCT) with helical CT scanning were compared for 21 patients with maxillofacial bone fractures. The results of this study suggest that the 3DCT evaluation can be divided into 3 groups. The first group, in which 3DCT is superior to 2DCT, includes severe complicated midface fractures, for example, tripod fractures and complicated maxillary bone fractures. The second group, in which 3DCT is equal to 2DCT, includes simple fractures, for example, nasal bone fractures and isolated zygomatic fractures. In this group, patients and their families could easily understand the nature of the fracture and clinical course shown by 3DCT as compared with conventional X-ray and 2DCT. The third group, in which 3DCT is inferior to 2DCT, includes blowout fractures. Although 3DCT does not provide additional information in blowout fractures, helical scanning permits clear observation of multiplanar images without artifacts arising from metal prostheses by excluding lower slices during image reconstruction. We conclude that 3DCT provides useful information, especially in regard to the extent of complex fracture lines, as in tripod fractures.</p>
Keywords 3DCT helical CT maxillofacial bone fractures facial bone fractures
Amo Type Article
Published Date 1997-08
Publication Title Acta Medica Okayama
Volume volume51
Issue issue4
Publisher Okayama University Medical School
Start Page 219
End Page 225
ISSN 0386-300X
NCID AA00508441
Content Type Journal Article
language 英語
File Version publisher
Refereed True
PubMed ID 9284970
Web of Sience KeyUT A1997XU03200006