# Efficiency of 2D versus 3D CT scans in maxillofacial trauma: A retrospective study

## TL;DR

This study compares 2D and 3D CT scans for diagnosing maxillofacial trauma and finds that 2D scans are more effective for fracture detection and diagnosis.

## Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence that 2D CT slices outperform 3D reconstructions in identifying and diagnosing maxillofacial fractures.

## Key findings

- 2D CT slices detected 100% of fractures, while 3D slices missed 4%.
- 2D CT slices improved diagnosis in 66.66% of fracture score combinations.
- 3D CT slices are limited in detecting minimally displaced fractures and nasal/ocular fractures.

## Abstract

The transition from 2D CT slices to 3D CT volume rendering reconstructions has significantly improved the precision of the trauma
diagnoses and broadened the range of potential treatments. Using a 64-slice CT scanner, the fracture detection score and fracture
comparative score were used to compare 2D and 3D fracture cases for detection and diagnosis. The study comprised 200 maxillofacial
fracture cases. 2D CT cuts detected 100% of fractures, but 3D cuts missed 4%. In 66.66% of fracture score combinations, 2D CT slices
could improve diagnosis. This study showed that 2D CT cuts are better at fracture identification and diagnosis than 3D CT reconstruction
cuts. 3D CT cuts show displaced fractures overall; however, they are confined to minimally displaced fracture segments and nasal and
ocular fracture locations.