Current Approach in the Management of Patients With Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region

Santos, Thiago de Santana; Avelar, Rafael Linard; Melo, Auremir Rocha; Moraes, Hécio Henrique Araújo de; Dourado, Edwaldo

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.038

Cited by 31 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, US is operator dependent [3]. CT is the best modality to detect metallic FBs [7], and it is also able to detect organic FBs, in which case a wide Hounsfield units (HU) window (between 500 and 1000 HU) should be used [4,[8][9][10][11]. MRI provides excellent soft tissue contrast allowing for the detection of small FBs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radiology of foreign bodies: how do we image them?

Ingraham

Mannelli²,

Robinson

et al. 2015

Emerg Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the sensitivity of detecting the most commonly encountered foreign bodies in Emergency Radiology using all imaging modalities (conventional radiography, computed tomography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging). The following materials were inserted into a pig-leg phantom and imaged using conventional radiography, computed tomography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging: Plastics #1, 2, 3, 5, and compostable plastic; dry and wet wood, aluminum, gravel, glass (tinted and non-tinted), and Salmon and Halibut fish bones. The visibility of plastic is variable on both conventional radiography and computed tomography, depending on composition, but all types of plastic are well visualized on ultrasound. Wood is most easily identified and localized on both computed tomography and ultrasound, is only faintly visible on conventional radiography, and is not well visualized on magnetic resonance imaging. Gravel, glass, and aluminum are well visualized on all modalities, with the exception of magnetic resonance imaging, where there is significant artifact surrounding the foreign body. Fish bones (Halibut and Salmon) are well visualized on conventional radiography, computed tomography, and ultrasound. Conventional radiography and computed tomography are great modalities for detecting foreign bodies of various compositions. Computed tomography is particularly useful at localizing the foreign body and determining its relationship to surrounding structures and its depth of involvement. All foreign bodies are visualized on ultrasound if the location is known and the foreign body is in the plane of the transducer. Magnetic resonance imaging is not helpful in detecting foreign bodies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MRI provides excellent soft tissue contrast allowing for the detection of small FBs. However, MRI can cause significant artifact and/or motion in the setting of ferromagnetic FBs and must be avoided when the presence of this kind of FBs is suspected [10,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiology of foreign bodies: how do we image them?

Ingraham

Mannelli²,

Robinson

et al. 2015

Emerg Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plain radiographs are usually the first form of examination used to detect foreign bodies [1][2][3][4][5]. In cases where the object can not be detected on plain radiographs or the exact location of the object needs to be identified, CT scans are helpful.…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonography for foreign bodies in the soft tissue

Yolcu

2015

The American Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…6 Selection of the antibiotics as prophylaxis for the surgical retrieval will depend on its location and communications with oral cavity, nasal cavity and proximity to the meninges. Foreign bodies in orbit generally have higher morbidity than other sites, requiring more aggressive medical management.…”

Section: Management Of Wooden Foreign Bodiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of wooden foreign bodies in craniofacial region

Loganathan

Chacko

Saravanan

et al. 2012

Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even though variety of foreign bodies has been reported in a various locations in the craniofacial region, wooden foreign bodies are uncommon. Appropriate management of wooden foreign bodies is considered essential because of their infectious complications and difficulty in radiographic localization. Even though literature is replete with articles on management of foreign bodies in the craniofacial region, specific management of wooden foreign bodies are rarely reported. The purpose of this article is to report two cases of deeply placed wooden foreign body and a protocol for managing them in the maxillofacial region.

show abstract

Current Approach in the Management of Patients With Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region

Cited by 31 publications

References 23 publications

Radiology of foreign bodies: how do we image them?

Radiology of foreign bodies: how do we image them?

Ultrasonography for foreign bodies in the soft tissue

Management of wooden foreign bodies in craniofacial region

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About