Year: 2026 | Month: April | Volume: 16 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 96-105
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijhsr.20260413
Comparative Evaluation of Axial, Multiplanar and Three-Dimensional Reconstructed MDCT Images in Maxillofacial Fractures
Rajbir Singh1, Arvinder Singh2, Kunwarpal Singh3
1Resident, Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Sri Amritsar, Punjab, India
2Head and Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Sri Amritsar, Punjab, India
3Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Sri Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Corresponding Author: Dr. Rajbir Singh
ABSTRACT
Background: Maxillofacial fractures involve complex anatomy and often require precise imaging for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) allows axial, multiplanar, and three-dimensional image reconstruction, each of which may provide distinct diagnostic advantages.
Materials and Methods: This observational cross-sectional study included 81 patients with maxillofacial trauma evaluated using a 32-slice MDCT scanner. Axial, coronal, sagittal, and three-dimensional reconstructed images were assessed for fracture detection in the frontal bone, nasal bones, maxillary bone, zygomatic bone, mandible and orbit. The diagnostic performance of different reconstruction planes was compared statistically, with p < 0.05 considered significant.
Results: The mean age of patients was 33.3 ± 15.8 years, and 90.1% were males. Road traffic accidents were the commonest mode of injury. The most frequent fractures involved the maxillary lateral wall, zygomatic arch, maxillary anterior wall, and nasal bones. Sagittal images showed significantly lower detection of medial and lateral orbital wall fractures, mandibular body fractures, and some maxillary wall fractures. Three-dimensional images were most useful for zygomatic arch, zygomaticomaxillary complex, nasal bone, frontal bone, and anterior maxillary wall fractures, while coronal images showed better visualization of posterior maxillary wall fractures.
Conclusion: No single reconstruction plane was sufficient for complete assessment of maxillofacial trauma. Combined interpretation of axial, multiplanar, and three-dimensional CT images provides the most accurate evaluation of fracture extent and pattern.
Key words: Maxillofacial trauma and fractures; MDCT; 3D reconstruction; Orbital fractures; Road traffic accidents; Trauma imaging.