Foreign Bodies in the Maxillofacial Region: Assessment With Multidetector Computed Tomography
Introduction
Maxillofacial region is an anatomically complex district, representing a complex crossroads of different systems and apparatus. Despite the little exposed surface, the chance of penetrating injuries to this site is at least similar to other regions of the body owing to the “pivotal role” of the face in human relations. Furthermore, in this area lie the external openings of the respiratory and digestive systems and the orbital cavities, which represent other ways through which foreign bodies (FBs) can penetrate both in the same cavities and across them in deep spaces of maxillofacial area.1, 2, 3 All external objects located in the human body are usually considered as FBs. They can be found not only in oral, nasal, or ocular cavities but also in the surrounding soft tissues, in the facial bones, and in other cavities of head and neck region, such as infratemporal fossa, parapharyngeal space, and sphenopalatine fossa. Furthermore, FB accidentally introduced and lost in visceral cavities (mouth, ear, and nose), particularly in pediatric subjects, may be quickly removed during direct inspection. Many emergency calls describe different accident scenarios with FB penetration, especially in case of motor vehicle accident where broken glasses, metal slivers, or rubbles may deeply penetrate the maxillofacial region via skin. The question is what is the role of imaging in patients with facial FB. The answer is that imaging is crucial to identify quickly the penetrating FB (PFB) and all the related pathologies, especially to rapidly address the patients with the correct therapy. Moreover, the complex anatomy of head and neck region and the different characteristics of the FB and its location require different diagnostic protocols. In particular, the presence of a crucial vascular and nervous network in this region requires at least vascular studies and mapping to define the 3-dimensional shape of FB and its relationship with the surrounding structures.4, 5, 6
Section snippets
Anatomy
The anatomy of the maxillofacial region is crucial to foresee correctly the location of any FB based on its doorway, thus predicting any life-threatening complication. In particular, vascular and nervous structures may be impaired by FBs, not only along its pathway inside the body during penetration but also in case of wrong handling of procedures during removal. Maxillofacial area may be defined as the anatomical region lying on the facial skeleton from the inferior outline of the maxilla up
Diagnostic Imaging in FBs
Based on the access paths, it is possible to distinguish ingested, inhaled, PFB, and iatrogenic (owing to surgery) FBs. Several imaging techniques may be used to detect and correctly characterize FBs. In particular, the choice of the appropriate technique is related to several factors: (1) doorway, (2) chemical composition, and (3) supposed location inside the body, such as the upper aerodigestive tract or other specific regions.15, 16, 17
Inhaled and Ingested FB
Accidental penetration of FB in the oral and nasal cavities is uncommon. Indeed, even in emergency such as a full-width frontal crash, conscious subjects tend to clamp their mouth to prevent penetration. In these cases, fractured teeth could accidentally penetrate into the mouth and even migrate to physiological shrinkages or anatomical cleft like Morgagni ventricle or pyriform sinuses.18, 19 In such cases, physical examination can successfully identify broken teeth, whereas radiographic
Penetrating Foreign Bodies
Accidental FB penetration in the maxillofacial region represents a dangerous condition often associated with polytrauma, and mostly occurring during road-traffic accidents or car crashes. Despite the little exposed surface, the chance of penetrating injuries to this site is high owing to the proximity of the face and the neck to the windscreen, whose fragments could easily reach skin or orbits and penetrate the underlying layers of the body. In case of low-energetic projection, slivers
Iatrogenic FBs
All the FBs accidentally penetrated during surgical procedures are defined as iatrogenic. A large number of reports describe the presence of FBs forgotten in the surgical field and retrieved only after long time in relation to the onset of specific set of symptoms. However, these reports are mainly focused on a specialist clinical setting (odontoiatric) and do not exhaustively carry out a critical review about how to adequately approach the patient to solve his problem. Because maxillofacial
Conclusions
FBs are a common finding in the maxillofacial region and may be encountered in different contexts. Mostly, in case of removal of ingested or inhaled FBs, no diagnostic procedure is needed in the decision making. High-energy PFBs often represent an emergency or potentially emergency condition, in which a correct depiction of penetration doorway and FB׳s exact shape and location is mandatory to assess the best surgical removal strategy. At present, iatrogenic FBs are the more common encountered
References (37)
- et al.
Wooden foreign bodies in facial injury: A radiological pitfall
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2001) - et al.
Visibility of foreign bodies in soft tissue in plain radiographs, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound. An in vitro study
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(1993) - et al.
Magnetic resonance imaging of nonmetallic orbital foreign bodies
Am J Ophthalmol
(1988) - et al.
Intraorbital foreign bodies—5 own cases and review of literature
Otolaryngol Pol
(2012) - et al.
Management of double-penetrating ocular injury with retained intraorbital metallic foreign body
J Chin Med Assoc
(2011) - et al.
Treatment of scattered glass foreign bodies in both the superficial and deep neck: A case report
Auris Nasus Larynx
(2005) - et al.
Role of computed tomography in the assessment of intraorbital foreign bodies
Semin Ultrasound CT MR
(2012) - et al.
A new approach using intraoperative ultrasound imaging for the localization and removal of multiple foreign bodies in the neck
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2003) - et al.
Not simply a foreign body
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2008) - et al.
Cranio-maxillofacial trauma: A 10 year review of 9543 cases with 21067 injuries
J Craniomaxillofac Surg
(2003)
An overview of penetrating ocular trauma with retained intraocular foreign body
Saudi J Ophthalmol
Management of unusual soft tissue foreign bodies in the pediatric neck
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol Extra
Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of anatomical risk factors for pediatric obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea: A pilot study
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol
Management of wooden foreign bodies in craniofacial region
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res
Errors in the radiological evaluation of the alimentary tract: Part I
Semin Ultrasound CT MR
Cyst-like periapical lesion healing in an orthodontic patient: A case report with five-year follow-up
G Ital Endodonzia
Orbital fractures: Role of imaging
Semin Ultrasound CT MR
The concept of error and malpractice in radiology
Semin Ultrasound CT MR
Cited by (9)
ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging of Facial Trauma Following Primary Survey
2022, Journal of the American College of RadiologyCitation Excerpt :As well, it is less reliant on patient positioning than radiography. CT is generally considered as the first-line of imaging to identify penetrating foreign bodies and the subsequent determination of their trajectory and extent of the injury [47,48]. A novel volume visualization tool, cinematic rendering, is a promising technique to illustrate maxillofacial fractures [41].
Practical Imaging Evaluation of Foreign Bodies in Children: An Update
2017, Radiologic Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :Advance reconstruction algorithms are now available to diminish artifacts associated with metallic objects. Moreover, high-resolution images can be obtained using lower dose radiation reduction methods.81 MR imaging is used for the evaluation of various anomalies of the ear; however, MR imaging is not used as the initial imaging tool, especially if a metallic FB is suspected for which MR imaging is contraindicated because of possible complications, including intracranial migration.76
Primary Management of Soft Tissue Trauma and Nerve Reconstruction
2017, Maxillofacial Surgery, 3rd Edition: Volume 1-2Comparison of accuracy between panoramic radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, and ultrasonography in detection of foreign bodies in the maxillofacial region: An in vitro study
2018, Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeonsAcute and overuse elbow trauma: Radio-orthopaedics overview
2018, Acta Biomedica