Intraorbital wooden foreign body: clinical analysis of 32 cases, a 10-year experience

Taş, Süleyman; Top, Hüsamettin

doi:10.5505/tjtes.2014.93876

Cited by 44 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2,3 In a 2014 analysis of 32 cases, CT imaging was definitive in 72% of cases and suggestive in 28% of cases. 4 The detection of wooden foreign bodies is challenging, because wood is typically of low attenuation and can mimic air or fat on the standard CT window settings, although the density can be highly variable. 2,[5][6][7] Prior studies have reported ranges in HU based on the type and state of wood.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orbital wooden foreign body manifesting as hyperdensity on computed tomography

Scofield-Kaplan

Weidman

Moonis

et al. 2019

Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orbital wooden foreign body manifesting as hyperdensity on computed tomography

Scofield-Kaplan

Weidman

Moonis

et al. 2019

Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Wooden foreign bodies present low density or even are invisible on CT scan. The quantity and composition of foreign bodies are very difficult to identify, and the CT images of wooden foreign bodies will vary with time, which often leads to misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis 3, 4, 5. Wooden foreign bodies due to the pore on their surface and the characteristics of organic matter, are a great bacterial growth medium, and if not promptly removed, they may lead to infection 6, 7.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical diagnosis and treatment of intraorbital wooden foreign bodies

Zhou

Jin

et al. 2016

Chinese Journal of Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe intraorbital wooden foreign body is often misdiagnosed or missed on computed tomography (CT) scan, due to the invisible or unclear images. The residual foreign bodies often occur during surgical removal. The clinical manifestations, imaging features and treatment of intraorbital wooden foreign bodies were discussed in this study.MethodWe retrospectively analyzed 14 cases of intraorbital wooden foreign bodies managed at our hospital between January 2007 and May 2015. All patients underwent orbital CT examination before surgery, and surgery was performed under general anesthesia with orbital wound debridement and suture, as well as exploration and removal of wooden foreign bodies.ResultsAt first, 11 cases underwent removal of foreign bodies, including 1 case with incomplete removal and then receiving a secondary surgery. Foreign bodies were not found in three cases with preoperative misdiagnosis and orbital MRI found residual foreign bodies in the orbit. Operations were performed via primary wound approach in eight cases, conjunctival approach in two cases, and anterior orbitotomy in four cases. Postoperatively, one case was complicated with eye injuries, three cases with ocular muscle injuries, eight cases with visual loss, and eight cases with orbital abscess. The length of foreign bodies ranged from 1.8 cm to 11.0 cm. The maximum of four foreign bodies were removed at the same time.ConclusionBecause the imaging of orbital wooden foreign bodies is complex and varied, MRI should be combined when they are invisible on CT scan. At the same time injuries trajectory and clinical manifestations of patients should be taken into account. Surgical exploration should be extensive and thorough, and foreign bodies and orbital abscess must be cleared.

show abstract

“…Conventional radiography is the primary imaging modality for detection of FBs; however, superimposition of tissues in the path of X ray beam is the main drawback of 2D imaging (9-11). Non- radiopaque objects cannot be identified by this modality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Visibility of Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region: Comparison of Computed Tomography, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDetection of foreign bodies (FBs) is challenging. Selection of a fast and affordable imaging modality to locate the FB with minimal patient radiation dose is imperative.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare four commonly used imaging modalities namely cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) for detection of FBs in the head and neck region.Materials and MethodsIn this in vitro study, iron, glass, stone, wood, asphalt, and tooth samples measuring 0.1 × 0.5 × 0.5 cm were placed in the tongue muscle, soft tissue-bone interface and nasal cavity in a fresh sheep’s head and subjected to MRI, US, CT and CBCT. A total of 20 images were captured by each imaging system from the six materials in the afore-mentioned locations. The images were observed by an expert oral and maxillofacial radiologist and a general radiologist. To assess reliability, 20 images were randomly observed by the observers in two separate sessions. The images were classified into three groups of good visibility, bad visibility and invisible. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 18, Wilcoxon Signed Rank, Pearson chi square, and Fisher’s exact tests.ResultsAll FBs in the tongue and at the soft tissue-bone interface had good visibility on US (P = 1.00). Also, CBCT and CT had significantly different performance regarding FB detection (P < 0.001). All wooden samples in the nasal cavity were invisible on CT scans; while, only 20% of them were invisible on CBCT scans. MRI showed significant differences for detection of FBs in the three locations (P < 0.001). MRI could not locate iron samples due to severe artifacts and only showed their presence (bad visibility) but other FBs except for wood and tooth in the nasal cavity (100% invisible) had good visibility on MRI.ConclusionsUltrasound is recommended as the first choice when FB is located within the superficial soft tissues with no bone around it. In case of penetration of FB into deeper tissues or beneath bone, CT or CBCT are recommended. Otherwise, considering lower dose, CBCT is preferred over CT. We can use MRI if the FB is not ferromagnetic. However, CT is the first choice in emergency situations because of higher sensitivity.

show abstract

Intraorbital wooden foreign body: clinical analysis of 32 cases, a 10-year experience

Abstract: BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe herein the clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of intraorbital wooden foreign body injuries.

Cited by 44 publications

References 17 publications

Orbital wooden foreign body manifesting as hyperdensity on computed tomography

Orbital wooden foreign body manifesting as hyperdensity on computed tomography

Clinical diagnosis and treatment of intraorbital wooden foreign bodies

Evaluation of Visibility of Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region: Comparison of Computed Tomography, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About