Artifacts Caused by Orthodontic Appliances on Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Awareness and Knowledge Level of Maxillofacial Radiologists and Orthodontists

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 77 - 86, 28.03.2024

Umut Pamukçu , Tuba Tortop , Özge Özütürk , Sibel Açık Kemaloğlu , İlkay Peker

https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.1177260

Öz

Objective: Artifacts caused by orthodontic appliances on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) can affect the image quality and make diagnosis difficult. The debate is ongoing on whether orthodontic appliances should be removed to eliminate these problems. This study aimed to evaluate the awareness and knowledge level of dentists working in maxillofacial radiology and orthodontics about this subject through a questionnaire.
Methods: The questionnaire consisted of 20 items and four parts: A) Personal information, B) Awareness level about the artifacts and complications caused by orthodontic appliances on MRI, C) Knowledge level about the factors related to artifacts and complications caused by orthodontic appliances on MRI, and D) Preventive approaches. The questionnaire was prepared on Google Forms and sent to potential participants via e-mail. The Chi-square (χ2) test was used for the statistical analysis of the variables.
Results: Most participants were aware of the artifacts caused by orthodontic appliances on MRI (90.8%) (93.5% of maxillofacial radiologists and 88.5% of orthodontists) and thought that material type influenced the artifact formation (98.1%) (100% of maxillofacial radiologists and 96.3% of orthodontists). The percentage of participants with 1-5 years of experience who were aware of artifacts was less than those with more experience (p = .033). The percentage of orthodontists who referred patients for orthodontic appliance removal was higher than maxillofacial radiologists who requested the orthodontic appliance removal (93.5%>15%).
Conclusion: Simultaneously increasing demands for both orthodontic treatment and MRI in the society cause concerns about the MRI image quality due to artifacts on images of the head and neck region. The main output of this study is that dentists working in orthodontics and maxillofacial radiology have a high awareness and knowledge about the artifacts and complications caused by orthodontic appliances on MRI.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Magnetic resonance imaging, artifacts, orthodontic appliances

Destekleyen Kurum

None

Teşekkür

We thank all the participants who agreed to participate in the study.

Kaynakça

• Shalish M, Dykstein N, Friedlander-Barenboim S, Ben-David E, Gomori JM, Chaushu S. Influence of common fixed retainers on the diagnostic quality of cranial magnetic resonance images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(5):604–609. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.022
• Hargreaves BA, Worters PW, Pauly KB, Pauly JM, Koch KM, Gold GE. Metal- induced artifacts in MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(3):547–555. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7364
• Beuf O, Lissac M, Crémillieux Y, Briguet A. Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging disturbances and the magnetic susceptibility of dental materials. Dent Mater. 1994;10(4):265-268. DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(94)90072-8
• Schenck JF. The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys. 1996;23(6):815-850. DOI: 10.1118/1.597854
• Lee MJ, Kim S, Lee SA, Song HT, Huh YM, Kim DH, Han SH, Suh JS. Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. Radiographics 2007;27(3):791-803 DOI: 10.1148/rg.273065087
• Fache JS, Price C, Hawbolt EB, Li DK. MR imaging artifacts produced by dental materials. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1987;8(5):837-840
• Shellock F, Kanal E. Aneurysm clips: Evaluation of MR imaging artifacts at 1.5 T. Radiology 1998;209(2):563-566. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.209.2.9807590
• Marincas C, Mada M, Rotaru D, Carpenter A, Ciupa R. Evaluation of radio frequency-ınduced heating near fixed orthodontic appliances during mrı examination at 3 tesla. Acta Electroteh. 2013;54(1):72-75.
• Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G, Kemper J. Magnetic forces on orthodontic wires in high field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3 tesla. J Orofac Orthop. 2006;67(6):424-429. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-006-0621-x
• Kemper J, Klocke A, Kahl-Nieke B, Adam G. Orthodontic brackets in high field MR imaging: experimental evaluation of magnetic field interactions at 3.0 Tesla. RoFo. 2005;177(12):1691-1698. DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-858762
• Sfondrini MF, Preda L, Calliada F, Carbone L, Lungarotti L, Bernardinelli L, Gandini P, Scribante A. Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Its Effects on Metallic Brackets and Wires: Does It Alter the Temperature and Bonding Efficacy of Orthodontic Devices? Materials (Basel) 2019;12(23):3971. DOI: 10.3390/ma12233971
• Mir AP-B, Rahmati-Kamel M. Should the orthodontic brackets always be removed prior to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)? J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2016;6(2):142-152. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2015.08.007
• Hasanin M, Kaplan S. E, Hohlen B, Lai C, Nagshabandi R, Zhu X, Al-Jewair T. Effects of orthodontic appliances on the diagnostic capability of magnetic resonance imaging in the head and neck region: A systematic review. Int Orthod. 2019;17(3):403-414. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2019.06.001
• Eggers G, Rieker M, Kress B, Fiebach J, Dickhaus H, Hassfeld S. Artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging caused by dental material. MAGMA 2005;18(2):103-111. DOI: 10.1007/s10334-005-0101-0
• Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, Lee C, Feigelson HS, Flynn M, Greenlee RT, Kruger RL, Hornbrook MC, Roblin D, Solberg LI, Vanneman N, Weinmann S, Williams AE. Use of diagnostic ımaging studies andassociated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large ıntegrated health care systems, 1996-2010. JAMA 2012;307(22):2400-2409. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.5960
• Proffit WR, Fields HW, Jr., Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13(2):97-106.
• Beau A, Bossard D, Gebeile-Chauty S. Magnetic resonance imaging artefacts and fixed orthodontic attachments. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37(1):105-110. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cju020
• Blankenstein F, Truong BT, Thomas A, Thieme N, Zachriat C. Predictability of magnetic susceptibility artifacts from metallic orthodontic appliances in magnetic resonance imaging. J Orofac Orthop. 2015;76(1):14-29. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-014-0258-0
• Dalili Kajan Z, Khademi J, Alizadeh A, Babaei Hemmaty Y, Atrkar Roushan Z. A comparative study of metal artifacts from common metal orthodontic brackets in magnetic resonance imaging. Imaging Sci Dent. 2015;45(3):159-168. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2015.45.3.159
• Costa AL, Appenzeller S, Yasuda C-L, Pereira FR, Zanardi VA, Cendes F. Artifacts in brain magnetic resonance imaging due to metallic dental objects. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009;14(6):E278-282.
• Hasegawa M, Miyata K, Abe Y, Ishigami T. Radiofrequency heating of metallic dental devices during 3.0 T MRI. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(5):20120234. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20120234
• Harris TM, Faridrad MR, Dickson JA. The benefits of aesthetic orthodontic brackets in patients requiring multiple MRI scanning. J Orthod. 2006;33(2):90-94. DOI: 10.1179/146531205225021465
• Okano Y, Yamashiro M, Kaneda T, Kasai K. Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of the temporomandibular joint in patients with orthodontic appliances. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003;95(2):255-263. DOI: 10.1067/moe.2003.37
• Patel A, Bhavra GS, O'Neill JR. MRI scanning and orthodontics. J Orthod. 2006;33(4):246-249. DOI: 10.1179/146531205225021726
• Blankenstein F, Asbach P, Beuer F, Glienke J, Mayer S, Zachriat C. Magnetic permeability as a predictor of the artefact size caused by orthodontic appliances at 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(1):281-289. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1788-1
• Zachriat C, Asbach P, Blankenstein K, Peroz I, Blankenstein F. MRI with intraoral orthodontic appliance—a comparative in vitro and in vivo study of image artefacts at 1.5 T. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(6):20140416. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140416
• Cassetta M, Pranno N, Stasolla A, Orsogna N, Fierro D, Cavallini C, Cantisani V. 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. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46(6):20170051. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20170051
• Zhylich D, Krishnan P, Muthusami P, Rayner T, Shroff M, Doria A, Tompson B, Lou W, Suri S. Effects of orthodontic appliances on the diagnostic quality of magnetic resonance images of the head. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;151(3):484-499. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.07.020
• Hosein I, Sherriff M, Ireland A. Enamel loss during bonding, debonding, and cleanup with use of a self-etching primer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;126(6):717-724. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.10.032
• Sadowsky PL, Bernreuter W, Lakshminarayanan AV, Kenney P. Orthodontic appliances and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain and temporomandibular joint. Angle Orthod. 1988;58(1):9-20. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1988)058<0009:OAAMRI>2.0.CO;2
• Huettel SA, Song AW, McCarthy G. Functional magnetic resonance imaging. 1th ed. Sunderland: MA: Sinauer Associates; 2004.
• Shellock FG. Biomedical implants and devices: assessment of magnetic field interactions with a 3.0-Tesla MR system. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;16(6):721-732. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.10207
• Sinkiewicz D. MRI scan hazard. Br Dent J. 2013;214(8):376. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.388
• Sung JW, Kwon TY, Kyung HM. Debonding forces of three different customized bases of a lingual bracket system. Korean J Orthod. 2013;43(5):235-241. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2013.43.5.235
• Yassi K, Ziane F, Bardinet E, Moinard M, Veyret B, Chateil J. Evaluation of the risk of overheating and displacement of orthodontic devices in magnetic resonance imaging. J Radiol. 2007;88(2):263-268. DOI: 10.1016/s0221-0363(07)89813-1
• Gorgulu S, Ayyildiz S, Kamburoglu K, Gokce S, Ozen T. Effect of orthodontic brackets and different wires on radiofrequency heating and magnetic field interactions during 3-T MRI. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43(2):20130356. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20130356
• Elison JM, Leggitt VL, Thomson M, Oyoyo U, Wycliffe ND. Influence of common orthodontic appliances on the diagnostic quality of cranial magnetic resonance images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134(4):563-572. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.10.038
• Hinshaw Jr D, Holshouser B, Engstrom H, Tjan A, Christiansen E, Catelli W. Dental material artifacts on MR images. Radiology. 1988;166(3):777-779. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.166.3.3340777
• Fellner C, Behr M, Fellner F, Held P, Handel G, Feuerbach S. Artifacts in MR imaging of the temporomandibular joint caused by dental alloys: A phantom model study at T1.5. RoFo. 1997;166(5):421-428. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1015452
• Herold T, Caro WC, Heers G, Perlick L, Grifka J, Feuerbach S, Nitz W, Lenhart M. Influence of sequence type on the extent of the susceptibility artifact in MRI–A shoulder specimen study after suture anchor repair. Rofo. 2004;176(9):1296-1301. DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-813404
• Guermazi A, Miaux Y, Zaim S, Peterfy CG, White D, Genant HK. Metallic artefacts in MR imaging: effects of main field orientation and strength. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(4):322-328. DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(02)00540-8
• Starcuk Z. Evaluation of MRI artifacts caused by metallic dental implants and classification of the dental materials in use. Meas Sci Rev. 2006;6(2):357-362.
• Leite LP, Bell RA. Adverse hypersensitivity reactions in orthodontics. Semin Orthod. 2004;10(4):240-243 44.
• Shafiei F, Honda E, Takahashi H, Sasaki T. Artifacts from dental casting alloys in magnetic resonance imaging. J Dent Res. 2003;82(8):602-606. DOI: 10.1177/154405910308200806
• Asano S, Kaneda T, Fukuda T, Makiyama Y, Hirota H, Saitoh K, Negishi S, Kasai K. Influence of metal artifact by orthodontic appliances on brain MRI. Int J Oral-Med Sci. 2016;14(4):74-81.
• Degrazia FW, Genari B, Ferrazzo VA, Santos-Pinto AD, Grehs RA. Enamel Roughness Changes after Removal of Orthodontic Adhesive. Dent J (Basel). 2018;6(3):39. DOI: 10.3390/dj6030039
• Yassaei S, Aghili H, KhanPayeh E, Goldani Moghadam M. Comparison of shear bond strength of rebonded brackets with four methods of adhesive removal. Lasers Med Sci. 2014;29(5):1563-1568. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-013-1310-9
• Lee YH, Lim D, Kim E, Kim S, Song HT, Suh JS. Feasibility of fat-saturated T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging with slice encoding for metal artifact correction (SEMAC) at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;32(8):1001-1005. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2014.04.009
• Gunzinger JM, Delso G, Boss A, Porto M, Davison H, von Schulthess GK, Huellner M, Stolzmann P, Veit-Haibach P, Burger IA. Metal artifact reduction in patients with dental implants using multispectral three-dimensional data acquisition for hybrid PET/MRI. EJNMMI Phys. 2014;1(1):102. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-014-0102-z