FDA RULES ON XRAY

Home Forums Oral Diagnosis & Medicine FDA RULES ON XRAY

Welcome Dear Guest

To create a new topic please register on the forums. For help contact : discussdentistry@hotmail.com

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #10513
    Drsumitra
    Offline
    Registered On: 06/10/2011
    Topics: 238
    Replies: 542
    Has thanked: 0 times
    Been thanked: 0 times

    The Food and Drug Administration has a proposition for the companies that make X-ray machines.

    Make sure your new equipment has settings and instructions that minimize radiation hazards for kids, or the agency will look to slap a label on the machines that recommends they not be used for children at all.

    The agency proposed the approach today (details in the Federal Register); it’s the latest move to curb radiation hazards from imaging equipment.

    X-rays and CT scans can provide doctors with lots of useful information. But the radiation that creates the helpful images also increases a person’s risk for cancer. There’s been an explosion in the use of imaging tests. And rising radiation doses, particularly from CT scans, have drawn concern.

    The cancer risk increases with the dose of X-rays received during a person’s lifetime, so kids’ exposure is particularly important. It’s also the case that children are more sensitive to X-ray damage.

    The FDA is also telling parents to speak up. If a doctor orders a test or procedure that uses X-rays, parents shouldn’t be afraid to ask if it’s really necessary. Also, it doesn’t hurt to ask if there’s an acceptable alternative, such as ultrasound or MRI, that doesn’t rely on X-rays.

    Even so, the agency doesn’t want people to forgo needed X-rays. “The risk from a medically necessary imaging exam is quite small when compared to the benefit of accurate diagnosis or intervention,” Dr. Jeffrey Shuren, head of FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in a statement. “There is no reason for patients who need these exams to avoid them.”

    The agency scheduled a public meeting in July to talk about the proposal.

    The Medical Imaging & Techonology Alliance, a trade group, said it looks forward to commenting on the FDA’s proposal and working with the agency.

     

    #15651
    Drsumitra
    Offline
    Registered On: 06/10/2011
    Topics: 238
    Replies: 542
    Has thanked: 0 times
    Been thanked: 0 times

    Could 3D ultrasound imaging improve the way periodontal disease is diagnosed and treated? A research team from West Virginia University (WVU) thinks so.
    While ultrasound is best known in dentistry for its scaling and surgical abilities, the WVU team is studying the use of high-frequency ultrasound to construct 3D images of the mandible and surrounding tissues. They recently received a $393,575 grant from the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research for a two-year project, Non-Invasive High-Resolution Diagnosis of Periodontal Attachment Levels Using Real-Time Quantitative Ultrasound Imaging.

    Ultrasound imaging offers several advantages over conventional x-rays for periodontal applications, said Osama Mukdadi, Ph.D., an assistant professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering in the College of Engineering and Mineral Resources and lead researcher on the project. In particular, ultrasound can detect minute defects in bone that are difficult to see using radiographs, and it is safer because there is no exposure to ionizing radiation.

    "X-rays have good resolution, but they are not sensitive to bone defects because of the shadowing, and they cannot provide enough information about periodontal disease at an early stage," Mukdadi told DrBicuspid.com. "Ultrasound has superior resolution, sensitivity, and contrast."

    For example, at least 25% of the bone has to be gone before that loss can be seen on a radiograph, said Richard Crout, D.D.S., M.S., associate dean for research at the WVU School of Dentistry who is collaborating with Mukdadi and Peter Ngan, D.M.D., a professor and chair of orthodontics, on this project. So having a tool that can image early bone loss would be a boon for dental practitioners and patients alike.

    "There is a pressing need for the development of better technologies for the early detection of periodontal disease," Dr. Crout said. "This technology provides more detail of the underlying bone surrounding the teeth than an x-ray but is less invasive since there is no radiation." Ultrasound imaging can also help determine what type of defect the practitioner is looking at, he added.

    It also has some advantages over optical imaging techniques such as optical coherence tomography for periodontal applications, Mukdadi noted. "Optical imaging is a good solution, but it cannot see beneath the gingiva. We are interested in finding opaque objects or opaque defects, and optics doesn’t help with that."

    How it works

    Ultrasound works by transmitting high-frequency sound pulses into tissue. As the sound waves travel, they hit a boundary between tissues (for example, between fluid and soft tissue or soft tissue and bone). Some waves are reflected back to the probe, while some travel on further until they reach another boundary and get reflected. The reflected waves are picked up by a probe and relayed to the machine, which calculates the distance from the probe to the tissue using the speed of sound in tissue and the time of each echo’s return. The system then displays the distances and intensities of the echoes on the screen, forming a 2D image.

    Defected dentate dried cadaver mandible. Top, photographic image for the mandible with a rectangle showing the scanned region and three landmarks. Right, 3D ultrasound surface image for the jawbone surface for the rectangular region described in top image with landmarks. Images courtesy of Osama Mukdadi, West Virginia University College of Engineering and Mineral Resources.
    The WVU ultrasound system goes a step further by providing 3D images. It employs high-frequency ultrasound-focused transducers (15 and 30 MHz) and a 1-GHz data acquisition card synchronized with a 2D stage positioning system. Signal processing algorithms are applied on the received ultrasound signals for filtering, focusing, and envelope detection prior to frame reconstruction, and an edge detection technique is used to detect the bone surface in each frame. The edges are combined to render a 3D surface image of the jawbone.

    "The system utilizes a high-frequency ultrasound transducer that is capable of reconstructing 3D images of the jawbone," Mukdadi said. "These images reveal important information about opaque boney defects that could result due to periodontal diseases. The high frequency and thus high resolution images could detect tiny defects, which is important for early diagnosis of periodontal diseases."

    Mukdadi’s team has applied for a patent for this technology and is gearing up to begin clinical trials once their current research project is complete. A commercial version of the system could become available within two years at a cost of around $30,000 to $40,000, Mukdadi said.

    Although the price might be off-putting to some, ultrasound’s unique diagnostic capabilities would be an attractive addition to clinical dentists. Early detection can be a critical factor in the successful treatment of periodontal disease, said David Cochran, D.D.S., Ph.D., president of the American Academy of Periodontology and chair of the department of periodontics at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, in a statement to DrBicuspid.com.

    "It is always encouraging to see advances in technology, especially in imaging technology, that will allow periodontists to better serve our patients by catching the disease early and increasing their chances of achieving comprehensive oral health," he added.

     

    #16061
    drmithila
    Offline
    Registered On: 14/05/2011
    Topics: 242
    Replies: 579
    Has thanked: 0 times
    Been thanked: 0 times

    A growing body of evidence suggests that radiographs used in dental and medical practices can induce cytotoxic effects in the exposed tissue at the cellular level and damage DNA.
    Researchers from the Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research in India used a micronucleus assay test to assess chromosomal damage in the buccal mucosa and maxillary anterior gingiva,

    “In the past, various biomarkers assessing metaphase chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid exchanges, and host cell reactivation have been used to determine the effect of ionizing radiation,” the study authors wrote. “However, these methods were typically laborious and time-consuming or required a high level of expertise to accurately interpret the slides.”

    Micronucleus assays can be used to assess chromosomal damage and are commonly examined in routine cytopathologic preparations, the researchers added. In addition, micronucleus assay tests are simple, rapid, and do not require much expertise.

    Statistically significant increase

    For this study, the researchers analyzed the panoramic radiographs of 80 patients in two groups: Group 1 included 20 males and 20 females, ages 15-25 years; group 2 included 20 males and 20 females, ages 40-50 years. All radiographs were taken using an Orthophos XG 5 DS Ceph (Sirona Dental Systems) with these parameters: 64 kV, 8 mA, 14.1 seconds.

    The mucosal samples were taken from the buccal mucosa and gingiva using a wooden spatula immediately before radiographic exposure and 10 days after exposure. For each subject, a minimum of 500 cells each from the gingiva and buccal mucosa were studied using blind analysis, for a total of 1,000 cells for each individual, both pre- and postexposure, at 1,000x magnification.

    The researchers found a statistically significant increase in the micronucleus count of the gingival epithelial cells after radiographic exposure: 1.08 before and 1.6 after (p < 0.05). They also found an increase in the postexposure micronucleus count in the buccal mucosa, although it was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Age also appeared to be a factor, they reported, suggesting that micronucleus frequency increases with age.

    “Epithelial cells are easy to obtain and appear to be target cells for this particular x-ray exposure,” they wrote. “The higher micronucleus frequency in epithelial cells obtained from the gingival can be explained by the direct exposure of gingival epithelium to x-rays since the radiation from panoramic radiography is directly absorbed by gingival cells.”

    The researchers suggest a need for larger epidemiologic studies to precisely quantify the risk of these effects, but also caution that radiographs should be taken with adequate protection measures and only when the potential benefit outweighs the potential risk.

    “Although radiation-related effects from panoramic radiography are reduced compared with full-mouth intraoral periapical radiographs or radiotherapy, the results of this study show that genotoxic effects do take place,” they concluded.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.