Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations 1/2017

17.03.2016 | Original Article

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

verfasst von: Felix H. Blankenstein, Patrick Asbach, Florian Beuer, Johannes Glienke, Stefan Mayer, Christine Zachriat

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

Artefacts caused by orthodontic attachments limit the diagnostic value and lead to removal of these appliances before magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic permeability can predict the artefact size. There is no standardised approach to determine the permeability of such attachments. The aim was to establish a reliable approach to determine artefact size caused by orthodontic attachments at 1.5 T MRI.

Materials and methods

Artefact radii of 21 attachments were determined applying two prevalent sequences of the head and neck region (turbo spin echo and gradient echo). The instrument Ferromaster (Stefan Mayer Instruments, Dinslaken) is approved for permeability measurements of objects with a minimum size (d = 20 mm, h = 5 mm). Eleven small test specimens of known permeability between 1.003 and 1.431 were produced. They are slightly larger than the orthodontic attachments. Their artefacts were measured and cross tabulated against the permeability. The resulting curve was used to compare the orthodontic attachments with the test bodies.

Results

Steel caused a wide range of artefact size of 10–74 mm subject to their permeability. Titanium, cobalt-chromium and ceramic materials produced artefact radii up to 20 mm. Measurement of artefacts of the test bodies revealed an interrelationship according to a root function. The artefact size of all brackets was below that root function.

Conclusions

The permeability can be reliably assessed by conventional measurement devices and the artefact size can be predicted. The radiologist is able to decide whether or not the orthodontic attachments should be removed.

Clinical relevance

This study clarifies whether an orthodontic appliance must be removed before taking an MRI.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Okano Y, Yamashiro M, Kaneda T, et al. (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of the temporomandibular joint in patients with orthodontic appliances. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 95:255–263CrossRefPubMed Okano Y, Yamashiro M, Kaneda T, et al. (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of the temporomandibular joint in patients with orthodontic appliances. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 95:255–263CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Kemper J, Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G (2005) Kieferorthopädische Brackets in der Hochfeld Magnetresonanz-Tomographie: Experimentelle Beurteilung magnetischer Anziehungs- und Rotationskräfte bei 3 Tesla. RoFo 177:1691–1698CrossRefPubMed Kemper J, Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G (2005) Kieferorthopädische Brackets in der Hochfeld Magnetresonanz-Tomographie: Experimentelle Beurteilung magnetischer Anziehungs- und Rotationskräfte bei 3 Tesla. RoFo 177:1691–1698CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hatch J, Deahl TS, Matteson SR (2014) CAT of the month: remove metallic orthodontic appliances prior to MRI imaging. Tex Dent J 131:26PubMed Hatch J, Deahl TS, Matteson SR (2014) CAT of the month: remove metallic orthodontic appliances prior to MRI imaging. Tex Dent J 131:26PubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Kajan ZD, Khademi J, Alizadeh A, Hemmaty YB, Roushan ZA (2015) A comparative study of metal artifacts from common metal orthodontic brackets in magnetic resonance imaging. Imaging Sci Dent 45:159–168CrossRef Kajan ZD, Khademi J, Alizadeh A, Hemmaty YB, Roushan ZA (2015) A comparative study of metal artifacts from common metal orthodontic brackets in magnetic resonance imaging. Imaging Sci Dent 45:159–168CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Blankenstein FH, Truong BT, Zachriat C, et al. (2015) About the predictability of susceptibility artifacts caused by metallic orthodontic appliances. J Orofac Orthop 76:14–29CrossRefPubMed Blankenstein FH, Truong BT, Zachriat C, et al. (2015) About the predictability of susceptibility artifacts caused by metallic orthodontic appliances. J Orofac Orthop 76:14–29CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Yassi K, Ziane F, Bardinet E, et al. (2007) Évaluation des risques d’échauffement et de déplacement des appareils orthodontiques en imagerie par résonance ma-gnétique. J Radiol 88:263–268CrossRefPubMed Yassi K, Ziane F, Bardinet E, et al. (2007) Évaluation des risques d’échauffement et de déplacement des appareils orthodontiques en imagerie par résonance ma-gnétique. J Radiol 88:263–268CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Regier M, Kemper J, Kaul MG, Feddersen M, Adam G, Kahl-Nieke B, Klocke A (2009) Radiofrequency-induced heating near fixed orthodontic appliances in high field MRI systems at 3.0 Tesla. J Orofac Orthop 70:485–494CrossRefPubMed Regier M, Kemper J, Kaul MG, Feddersen M, Adam G, Kahl-Nieke B, Klocke A (2009) Radiofrequency-induced heating near fixed orthodontic appliances in high field MRI systems at 3.0 Tesla. J Orofac Orthop 70:485–494CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Gorgülü S, Ayyildiz S, Kamburoglu K, Gokçe S, Ozen T (2014) Effect of orthodontic brackets and different wires on radiofrequency heating and magnetic field interactions during 3-T MRI. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20130356 PubMedPubMedCentral Gorgülü S, Ayyildiz S, Kamburoglu K, Gokçe S, Ozen T (2014) Effect of orthodontic brackets and different wires on radiofrequency heating and magnetic field interactions during 3-T MRI. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. doi:10.​1259/​dmfr.​20130356 PubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Wezel J, Kooij BJ, Webb AG (2014) Assessing the MR combatibility of dental retainer wires at 7 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 72:1191–1198CrossRefPubMed Wezel J, Kooij BJ, Webb AG (2014) Assessing the MR combatibility of dental retainer wires at 7 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 72:1191–1198CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G, Kemper J (2006) Magnetic forces on orthodontic wires in high field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3 Tesla. J Orofac Orthop 67:424–429CrossRefPubMed Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G, Kemper J (2006) Magnetic forces on orthodontic wires in high field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3 Tesla. J Orofac Orthop 67:424–429CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Elison JM, Leggitt VL, Thomson M, et al. (2008) Influence of common orthodontic appliances on the diagnostic quality of cranial magnetic resonance images. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 134:563–572CrossRef Elison JM, Leggitt VL, Thomson M, et al. (2008) Influence of common orthodontic appliances on the diagnostic quality of cranial magnetic resonance images. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 134:563–572CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Beau A, Bossard D, Gebeile-Chauty S (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts and fixed orthodontic attachments. Eur J Orthod 37:105–110CrossRefPubMed Beau A, Bossard D, Gebeile-Chauty S (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts and fixed orthodontic attachments. Eur J Orthod 37:105–110CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Wylezinska M, Pinkstone M, Hay N, et al. (2015) Impact of orthodontic appliances on the quality of craniofacial anatomical magnetic resonance imaging and real-time speech imaging. Eur J Orthod. doi:10.1093/ejo/cju103 PubMed Wylezinska M, Pinkstone M, Hay N, et al. (2015) Impact of orthodontic appliances on the quality of craniofacial anatomical magnetic resonance imaging and real-time speech imaging. Eur J Orthod. doi:10.​1093/​ejo/​cju103 PubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Zachriat C, Asbach P, Blankenstein KI, Peroz I, Blankenstein FH (2015) Magnetic Resonance imaging with intraoral orthodontic appliance—a comparative in vitro and in vivo study of image artefacts at 1.5 Tesla. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20140416 Zachriat C, Asbach P, Blankenstein KI, Peroz I, Blankenstein FH (2015) Magnetic Resonance imaging with intraoral orthodontic appliance—a comparative in vitro and in vivo study of image artefacts at 1.5 Tesla. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. doi:10.​1259/​dmfr.​20140416
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Herold T, Caro WC, Heers G, Perlick L, Grifka J, Feuerbach S, Nitz W, Lenhart M (2004) Influence of sequence type on the extent of the susceptibility artifact in MRI—a shoulder specimen study after suture anchor repair. Fortschr Rontgenstr (RoFo) 176(9):1296–1301CrossRef Herold T, Caro WC, Heers G, Perlick L, Grifka J, Feuerbach S, Nitz W, Lenhart M (2004) Influence of sequence type on the extent of the susceptibility artifact in MRI—a shoulder specimen study after suture anchor repair. Fortschr Rontgenstr (RoFo) 176(9):1296–1301CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Blankenstein FH, Truong BT, Thomas A, Schröder RJ, Naumann M (2006) Signal loss in magnetic resonance imaging caused by intraoral anchored dental magnetic materials. Rofo 178:787–793CrossRefPubMed Blankenstein FH, Truong BT, Thomas A, Schröder RJ, Naumann M (2006) Signal loss in magnetic resonance imaging caused by intraoral anchored dental magnetic materials. Rofo 178:787–793CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Bennett LH, Wang PS, Donahue MJ (1996) Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging frim metals. J Appl Phys 79:4712–4714CrossRef Bennett LH, Wang PS, Donahue MJ (1996) Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging frim metals. J Appl Phys 79:4712–4714CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Fache JS, Price C, Hawbolt EB, Li DK (1987) MR imaging artifacts produced by dental materials. Am J Neuroradiol 8:837–840PubMed Fache JS, Price C, Hawbolt EB, Li DK (1987) MR imaging artifacts produced by dental materials. Am J Neuroradiol 8:837–840PubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Nitz WR, Runge VM, Schmeets SH (2011) Praxiskurs MRT. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, p. 201 Nitz WR, Runge VM, Schmeets SH (2011) Praxiskurs MRT. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, p. 201
Metadaten
Titel
Magnetic permeability as a predictor of the artefact size caused by orthodontic appliances at 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging
verfasst von
Felix H. Blankenstein
Patrick Asbach
Florian Beuer
Johannes Glienke
Stefan Mayer
Christine Zachriat
Publikationsdatum
17.03.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1788-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Clinical Oral Investigations 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Zahnmedizin und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.