Literature DB >> 24997025

Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts and fixed orthodontic attachments.

Aurélien Beau1, Denis Bossard2, Sarah Gebeile-Chauty3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/
OBJECTIVES: Orthodontic appliances are often removed before magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans because they are known to produce artefacts. The purpose of this study was to find the exact indications for removal of various fixed attachments when imaging four specific areas of the head and neck. MATERIALS/
METHODS: Sixty patients requiring an MRI scan of the head for medical reasons volunteered for this investigation. One of four different types of fixed attachments (stainless steel brackets, titanium brackets, ceramic brackets with metal slots, and stainless steel retainers) were assigned to a patient. Each patient had two scans at 1.5 T: with an 'empty wax jig' and with a wax jig including the attachment. Archwires were not investigated as they are easily removed before a scan. Two radiologists evaluated the scans of each patient and each of the four areas under investigation: maxillary sinus, oral cavity, temporomandibular joints, and posterior cerebral fossa.
RESULTS: Stainless steel brackets always caused non-interpretability of all anatomic areas (100 per cent). Titanium brackets, ceramic brackets with metal slots, and stainless steel retainers caused artefact in the oral cavity only (for 20, 16.65, and 86.65 per cent of the subjects). CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Our results show that ceramic brackets with metal slots and titanium brackets do not always have to be removed before MRI scans of the head and neck, depending on the area under investigation. Metal fixed retainers should only be removed if the oral cavity itself is under investigation. Stainless steel brackets should always be removed before MRI scans of the head and neck.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24997025     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cju020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  12 in total

1.  Induced magnetic moment in stainless steel components of orthodontic appliances in 1.5 T MRI scanners.

Authors:  Zhiyue J Wang; Nancy K Rollins; Hui Liang; Yong Jong Park
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  MRI with intraoral orthodontic appliance-a comparative in vitro and in vivo study of image artefacts at 1.5 T.

Authors:  C Zachriat; P Asbach; K I Blankenstein; I Peroz; F H Blankenstein
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 2.419

3.  [Metal objects of the head and neck region in magnetic resonance imaging : Survey among radiologists].

Authors:  Ulrike Kielburg; Felix H Blankenstein
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Magnetization and demagnetization of magnetic dental attachments in a 3-T MRI system.

Authors:  Norio Hayashi; Akio Ogura; Toshio Tsuchihashi; Daisuke Takahashi; Tsuyoshi Matsuda; Shinya Seino; Tsukasa Doi
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2017-04-27

5.  Magnetic permeability as a predictor of the artefact size caused by orthodontic appliances at 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Felix H Blankenstein; Patrick Asbach; Florian Beuer; Johannes Glienke; Stefan Mayer; Christine Zachriat
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  The effects of a common stainless steel orthodontic bracket on the diagnostic quality of cranial and cervical 3T- MR images: a prospective, case-control study.

Authors:  Michele Cassetta; Nicola Pranno; Alessandro Stasolla; Nicola Orsogna; Davide Fierro; Costanza Cavallini; Vito Cantisani
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 2.419

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts caused by orthodontic appliances and/or implant-supported prosthesis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Katrine Mølgaard Johannsen; João Marcus de Carvalho E Silva Fuglsig; Brian Hansen; Ann Wenzel; Rubens Spin-Neto
Journal:  Oral Radiol       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 1.882

8.  Orthodontic appliances and MR image artefacts: An exploratory in vitro and in vivo study using 1.5-T and 3-T scanners.

Authors:  Mikael Sonesson; Fahad Al-Qabandi; Sven Månsson; Salem Abdulraheem; Lars Bondemark; Kristina Hellén-Halme
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2021-01-29

9.  Orthodontic treatment for a patient with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Manal A Bakathir
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep

10.  Influence of orthodontic appliance-derived artifacts on 3-T MRI movies.

Authors:  Erika Ozawa; Ei-Ichi Honda; Kulthida Nunthayanon Parakonthun; Hiroko Ohmori; Kazuo Shimazaki; Tohru Kurabayashi; Takashi Ono
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 2.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.