Aims and objectives
Foreign bodies into the soft tissues of the maxillofacial region are common pathology with which patients turn to dentists,
surgeons and radiologists.
The frequency of occurrence of foreign bodies among all diseases in this area is 3.8% [1].About 30% of all foreign bodies remain undiagnosed during the initial examination [2].Foreign bodies are detected by Ultrasonography accidentally,
soon after trauma or after the onset of symptoms.
In some cases,
patients are referred for ultrasonography after computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),
because of its...
Methods and materials
Materials.
Phantom features.
The invention relates to the field of ultrasonic research.
Phantoms for assessing the echo-semiotics of foreign bodies of organic and inorganic origin consist of two bodies and parts.
The bodies of the phantom are made of silicone-containing material and have the form of a rectangular parallelepiped measuring 210x50x100 mm with foreign bodies arranged in pairs in two parallel rows at a depth of 5 mm and 20 mm.
The material from which the phantom was made has acoustic properties similar to the...
Results
1.
Ultrasonography
As a result of the studies,
the following ultrasound picture of the phantom was visualized: three layers separated by two interlayers.
The upper layer (gel pillow) had increased echogenicity,quite heterogeneous ehostructure with small inclusions.
The first interlayer,
between the gelpillow and the top layer of the model,was visualized asa hyperechoic linear structure with a slight reverberation.
The second layer (the top layer of the phantom,
located at a depth of 0-20 mm)was visualized as an anechoic homogeneouslayer with single inclusions (artifacts).
The second...
Conclusion
Thus,
this phantom of the soft tissues is a useful model for studying the echosemiotics of foreign bodies with detailed visualization of objects.
At ultrasonography foreign bodies of organic and inorganic origin are visualized,
as a result of which this method of research is a priority at the final stage of diagnostics of the nature of a foreign body located in soft tissues and when planning an operational aid for its extraction.
References
1.Solmaz V.,
Hamidreza P.
Evaluation of Visibility of Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region: Comparison of Computed Tomography,
Cone Beam Computed Tomography,
Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Iran J.
Radiol.
2016.
13(4)
2.Krimmel M.,
Cornelius C.P.
Wooden foreign bodies in facial injury: a radiological pitfall.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2001.
Oct;30(5):445-7.
doi: 10.1054/ijom.2001.0109