著作: [高橋 章]/[菅原 千恵子]/顎顔面領域における超音波画像表示領域に関する検討/[四国歯学会雑誌]
(英) Evaluation of the Field of View in Maxillofacial Ultrasonography
(英) The purpose of this study was to compare the advantages of different fields of view (FOV) between Linear, Sector, and real-time panoramic view (SieScape^TM) in B-mode ultrasonography for the maxillofacial region. <Materials and methods> This prospective study included 103 maxillofacial examinations of 60 patients with space-occupying lesions and/or suspected of metastatic regional lymph nodes from oral cancer. These lesions were examined by ultrasonographic study with three different kinds of FOV, including Linear, Sector, and SieScape^<TM>. These images were digitally recorded and compared. Each examination was classified into 5 maxillofacial anatomical parts, 1) buccal & lip part, 2) parotid gland part, 3) submandibular part, 4) submental & sublingual part, and 5) neck part. The advantage of FOV was evaluated according to these anatomical parts. <Results> 1) Buccal & lip part: 16 examinations were collected. Linear and/or sector FOV provided sufficient images for observing the lesion and adjoining anatomical landmarks. 2) Parotid gland part: 7 examinations were obtained. The whole gland could be observed only in SieScape^<TM> in a single image. 3) Submandibular part: 43 examinations were obtained. The whole submandibular gland could be observed in Sector FOV, which was also useful to observe the structure adjoining the mandible, because the slanting ultrasound beam avoided the lingual mandibular bone and the deeper structure of the gland could be observed. Furthermore, for cases with many submandibular lymph nodes, sagittal SieScape^<TM> images provided a suitable reference image for later observation. 4) Submental & sublingual part: Linear FOV provided sufficient images. Sector FOV was also useful, if the lesion was large or located next to the mandible. 5) Neck part: The quality of diagnostic information did not differ between the three kinds of FOVs employed here, since this area was too large to observe in a single image. Furthermore, the exact location was hard to identify in the later evaluation since the anatomic structures did not much differ between upper and middle neck portions. <Conclusion> In the ultrasonographic examination of the maxillofacial area, we should select proper FOV to obtain useful diagnostic information.
|発行所||推奨||(英) The University of Tokushima / (日) 徳島大学|
|年月日||必須||2007年 7月 初日|