A Prospective Comparison of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Diagnostic tool for Maxillofacial Space Infections.
Aims and Objectives
The aim of this work was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus computed tomography (CT) in the initial evaluation of maxillofacial space infections by comparing various parameters of the imaging studies and comparing them on a three-point scale.


Materials and Methods
We prospectively evaluated 15 patients with head and neck space infections. All patients underwent CT and MRI using similar slice thickness. We reviewed all imaging studies with special attention to location, extension, source of infection, extent of bone involvement, odontogenic or nonodontogenic, and presence of gas/calcium in the lesions. All the parameters were graded based on a three-point scale and were compared statistically by paired t-test.


Results
According to the results we arrived at, MRI was superior to CT in regard to lesion conspicuity, extension, number of anatomic spaces involved, and source on infection. Although not significant, MRI detected a greater number of abscess collections. However, in the aspects of detection of intralesional gas and calcium and motion artifacts, CT was superior to MRI. However, these advantages of CT over MRI are not significantly better than those of MRI.


Conclusion
MRI was considered superior to CT in the initial evaluation of head and neck space infections. Our study thus concludes that MRI may be used as the primary modality to evaluate patients with head and neck infections when clinically feasible.
['Babu|V Ramesh|VR|', 'Ikkurthi|Srikanth|S|', 'Perisetty|Dinesh Kumar|DK|', 'Babu|K A Saran|KAS|', 'Rasool|Mahammad|M|', 'Shaik|Shanawaz|S|']
Computed tomography magnetic resonance imaging diagnostic tool space infection