Evaluation of magnetic resonance sialography and ultrasonography findings in salivary glands of patients with xerostomia
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess MR sialography and Ultrasonography as
objective tools to examine salivary glands in patients with xerostomia.
Materials and Methods: In this Cross-sectional descriptive study, MR sialography using salivary
secretion stimulation was performed in 16 patients (with the chief complaint of xerostomia) and
11 healthy volunteers. Visibility of the main duct and ductal branches were evaluated before and
after stimulation in axial and oblique sagittal plans, and were classified in to three grades (poor,
fair & good). Patients and volunteers were also examined by ultrasonography; their parenchymal
homogeneity of the salivary glands was graded from 0 to 5 and their echogenicity was divided
to three levels: hypoecho, isoecho and hyperecho. Size of the salivary glands was also measured.
Dependent T-test and independent T-test,Spearman and Chi-square analysis were performed to
analyze the results.
Results: In this study the results showed no significant difference in the visibility of salivary
glands ducts before and after salivary secretion stimulation in healthy volunteers. In the
patients group, however, significant difference was seen in the visibility of salivary glands ducts
after stimulation in sagittal planes of right and left parotid glands (P-Value=0.033) as well as
left submandibular glands (P-Value=0.035). No significant difference in the visibility of salivary
glands ducts was observed between healthy volunteers and patients,except in sagittal plan of left
parotid glands (P-Value=0.004). In addition, there was no significant difference in parenchymal
characteristics and size of salivary glands in ultrasonography results in the two groups. No
Significant correlation could be established between MR Sialography and Ultrasonography
findings.
Conclusions: Achieving no significant difference in imaging results between patients and
volunteers suggests that MR sialographic images and US features may not serve as suitable
diagnostic criteria in patients with xerostomia.
Keywords
References
- Porter SA SC, Hegarty AM. An update of etiology and management of xerostomia. Oral surg Oral med Oral pathol Ora radiol Oral endod. 2004;97:28-46.
- Glore R, Spiteri‐Staines K, Paleri V. A patient with dry mouth. Clinical Otolaryngology. 2009;34(4):358-63.
- Som PM CH. Head and neck imaging: Mosby; 2003.
- Jager L, Menauer F, Holzknecht N, Scholz V, Grevers G, Reiser M. Sialolithiasis: MR sialography of the submandibular duct--an alternative to conventional sialography and US? Radiology. 2000;216(3):665-71. Epub 2000/08/31.
- JR P. Textbook of Oral Medicine. 2 ed: Jaypee Brothers Medical Pub; 2008.
- Torres SR, Peixoto CB, Caldas DM, Silva EB, Akiti T, Nucci M, et al. Relationship between salivary flow rates and Candida counts in subjects with xerostomia. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontics. 2002;93:149-54.
- Wada A, Uchida N, Yokokawa M, Yoshizako T, Kitagaki H. Radiationinduced xerostomia: objective evaluation of salivary gland injury using MR sialography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(1):53-8. Epub 2008/10/10.
- Cho A KJ, Kim YK, Kho HS. salivary flow rate and clinical charasteristics of patients with xerostomia according to its aetiology. Oral Rehabilitation. 2010;37:185-93.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Health Care Administration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Mahrokh Imanimoghaddam
Publication Date
January 3, 2016
Submission Date
December 6, 2016
Acceptance Date
August 29, 2015
Published in Issue
Year 2016 Volume: 19 Number: 1