A Case Report of Metal Induced MRI Accident and Diagnosis by Ultrasonography

Year 2023, Volume: 13 Issue: 4, 909 - 912, 29.12.2023

Fatma Çağlayan , Gülsüm Akkaya , Zeynep Bayramoğlu , Esin Akol Görgün

https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.1105094

Abstract

Dental radiology has shown great developments in recent years. In addition to conventional radiography techniques, advanced imaging techniques are frequently used in dental radiology when necessary. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an advanced imaging technique that is frequently used because of its high soft tissue resolution and no risk of ionizing radiation. However, it should be noted that MRI also has some risks. Ultrasonography (USG) is a very useful technique for imaging foreign bodies especially superficial ones. The purpose of this case report was to present the USG diagnosis and subsequent surgical removal of a metallic foreign body that interferes with MRI in a cheek of 40 years old female. At the same time, it was aimed to draw attention to the disadvantages of metals for MRI and the role of USG in detecting superficial foreign bodies.

Keywords

Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultrasonography, metallic foreign body

References

• Geva T. Magnetic resonance imaging: historical perspective. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006;8(4):573-580. DOI: 10.1080/10976640600755302
• Çağlayan F and Yozgat İlbaş FN. Sonographic features of various dental materials and foreign bodies. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2022; 51: 20210182. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20210182
• Aras MH, Miloglu O, Barutcugil C, Kantarci M, Ozcan E, Harorli A. Comparison of the sensitivity for detecting foreign bodies among conventional plain radiography, computed tomography and ultrasonography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39(2):72-78. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr/68589458
• Sammet S. Magnetic resonance safety. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41(3):444-451. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-0680-4
• Woods TO. Standards for medical devices in MRI: Present and future. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;26(5):1186-1189. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21140
• Winter L, Seifert F, Zilberti L, Murbach M, Ittermann B. MRI-Related Heating of Implants and Devices: A Review. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021;53(6):1646-1665. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27194
• Nutt JG, Anderson VC, Peacock JH, Hammerstad JP, Burchiel KJ. DBS and diathermy interaction induces severe CNS damage. Neurology. 2001;56(10):1384-1386. DOI: 10.1212/wnl.56.10.1384
• Zanchi MG, Venook R, Pauly JM, Scott GC. An optically coupled system for quantitative monitoring of MRI-induced RF currents into long conductors. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29(1):169-178. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2031558
• Davis PL, Crooks L, Arakawa M, McRee R, Kaufman L, Margulis AR. Potential hazards in NMR imaging: Heating effects of changing magnetic fields and RF fields on small metallic implants. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;137(4):857-860. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.137.4.857
• Nyenhuis JA, Park S-M, Kamondetdacha R, Amjad A, Shellock FG, Rezai AR. MRI and implanted medical devices: basic interactions with an emphasis on heating. IEEE Transactions on device and materials reliability. 2005;5(3):467-480.
• Jungmann PM, Agten CA, Pfirrmann CW, Sutter R. Advances in MRI around metal. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;46(4):972-991. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25708
• Soto DM. Current guidelines for MRI safety in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Nursing 2020;50(2):24-29. DOI: 10.1097/01.NURSE.0000651612.85237.fc
• Leinung M, Loth A, Gröger M, Burck I, Vogl T, Stöver T, Helbig S. Cochlear implant magnet dislocation after MRI: Surgical management and outcome. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;277(5):1297-1304.. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-05826-x
• Buckwalter KA, Lin C, Ford JM. Managing postoperative artifacts on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2011;15(4):309-319. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1286013
• Koff MF, Shah P, Koch KM, Potter HG. Quantifying image distortion of orthopedic materials in magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;38(3):610-618.DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23991
• Zou YF, Chu B, Wang CB, Hu ZY. Evaluation of MR issues for the latest standard brands of orthopedic metal implants: plates and screws. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(3):450-457. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.12.001
• Månsson S, Müller GM, Wellman F, Nittka M, Lundin B. Phantom based qualitative and quantitative evaluation of artifacts in MR images of metallic hip prostheses. Phys Med. 2015;31(2):173-178. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.12.001
• Ahmad FU, Sidani C, Fourzali R, Wang MY. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging artifact with cobalt-chromium versus titanium spinal instrumentation: Presented at the 2013 Joint Spine Section Meeting. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(5):629-636. DOI: 10.3171/2013.7.SPINE1359
• Heyse TJ, Chong le R, Davis J, Boettner F, Haas SB, Potter HG. MRI analysis of the component-bone interface after TKA. Knee. 2012;19(4):290-294. DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2011.05.011
• Caglayan F, Bayrakdar IS. The intraoral ultrasonography in dentistry. Niger J Clin Pract.2018; 21(2): 125-133. DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.197016
• Tseng HJ, Hanna TN, Shuaib W, Aized M, Khosa F, Linnau KF. Imaging foreign bodies: Ingested, aspirated, and inserted. Ann Emerg Med. 2015;66(6):570-582.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.07.499
• Kim WJ, Kim WS, Kim HK, Bae TH. Multiple foreign bodies causing an orocutaneous fistula of the cheek. Arch Craniofac Surg. 2018;19(2):139-142. DOI: 10.7181/acfs.2018.00017