|
Are dental x-rays
dangerous?
Some people do not want diagnostic x-rays because they have
heard that the radiation is dangerous. In fact, they pose very little
danger. There are currently two methods of measuring exposure to
radiation.
The first and oldest unit of measure is
called a rem. A rem is a large unit, so exposure to medical
radiation is generally measured in millirems (mrem). (It takes a
thousand millirems to make a rem.) Dental x-rays on the slowest speed film
deliver about 4 mrem. (Most offices now use faster films which reduce
radiation by a factor of 2-4, the average dose across the board being about 2
mrem per intraoral film.) Thus, using the slowest speed film, a full mouth series
of dental x rays (18 intraoral films) delivers about 72 mrem. A
panorex
film delivers about 8 mrem. By comparison, according to the
National council on
radiation protection and measurements, the average person in the US is
exposed to about 360 mrem per year just from background sources. By this
measure, it would take approximately 5 full series of dental radiographs on the
slowest speed film to
equal the background radiation that the average citizen is exposed to on a
yearly basis. Note that we take a new full series every three to five years on
average. Most offices use faster film reducing the dose of radiation per
film by about half. Offices using digital radiography reduce the radiation
by even more.
The Washington State Department of Health has set the maximum
safe occupational whole body radiation exposure to 5000 mrem (5 rem)per year.
The same limit holds true for other states as well (ex.
New york -- see section 16.6). Finally,
5000 mrem is the
federal total effective, whole body, yearly
occupational dose limit. By this reckoning, it would take about 70
full mouth series of dental x-rays (18 films per survey) over the course of a
year to equal one years maximum safe occupational radiation level. It
would take 625 panorex films or 1250 individual intraoral
x-rays to get to this limit. The 5000 mrem yearly limit applies to persons
who are routinely exposed to ionizing radiation in the course of their jobs. This
is not to suggest that a member of the general public should routinely expect to
be exposed to 5000 mrem per year of diagnostic x-rays, but it is an
indication that the benefits of routine yearly diagnostic x-rays far, far
outweigh the dangers posed by the radiation. The average person in the US is exposed to about 360 mrem per
year just from background sources, but the actual amount of background radiation
received by any given person varies quite a bit depending upon that individual's
lifestyle choices. Background radiation comes from outer space, the earth,
natural materials (including natural foods), and even other people.
For example, flying cross country exposes a person to about 3-5 mrem over and
above the normal radiation he receives from outer space while simply walking
outdoors for the same length of time. Cooking with natural gas
exposes us to about an additional 10 mrem per year because of the naturally
occurring radon gas the cooking gas contains. Living in a brick
building adds an additional 10 mrem per year over and above the radiation you
would receive from living in a wooden structure. Simply sleeping next
to another person exposes each bed partner to an extra 2 mrem per year.
The second, newer measure of radiation is the millisievert (mSV)
which is a unit of measure that allows for a more meaningful comparison
between radiation sources that expose the entire body (such as natural
background radiation) and those that only expose a portion of the body (such as
dental and medical radiographs).
Dental x-rays are aimed in a tight beam at a small spot on the face.
The only structures that receive the full dose of x-radiation are the tissues in
the direct line of fire. The rest of the body receives only the radiation
that is scattered off of the structures in the line of fire. (Much less
radiation scatters from an object in an x-ray beam than from an object in a beam
of ordinary light due to the difference in the nature of the respective
radiation sources. Click
here for a better understanding of scatter
radiation.) Furthermore, the tissues at which dental x-rays are aimed are
much less prone to injury from x-radiation than are tissues in other parts of
the body, such as the intestinal lining or reproductive organs and other
constantly reproducing tissues. The newest unit of measurement, the
milisievert was designed to take this factor into account.
The table below is lifted from the
website
of the American Dental Association and is quite helpful in comparing the amount
of radiation received from dental x-rays to other medical and natural
sources. As you can see, by this more realistic measure, it would take 20
full series of x rays to equal the amount of radiation the average citizen picks
up from background sources each year: Note also that radiation to the
gastrointestinal (GI) tract is MUCH more damaging than radiation to the chest.
This is due to the increased vulnerability of the lining of the intestine
because the cells there are constantly reproducing and being replaced while the
cells in the lungs are not.
| Dental radiographs exposure:
Bitewings (4 films)
Full-mouth series (about 19 films)
Panorex (panoramic jaw film)
|
(mSV)
0.038
0.150
0.019 |
Medical radiographs exposure:
Lower GI series
Upper GI series
Chest
|
4.060
2.440
0.080 |
| Average radiation per person from outer space In Denver,
CO (per year) |
0.510 |
| Average radiation per person in the U.S. from Natural
sources (per year) |
3.000 |
What about danger to the x-ray technician? (scatter
radiation)
The x-radiation figures mentioned above pertain to the
patient who is in the direct line of fire from the x-ray tube. The
radiation received by the person taking the x-ray comes exclusively from
scatter, which is most easily understood by thinking about a flashlight
aimed at a wall in a completely darkened room. The spot on the wall
where the flashlight is aimed is the brightest because it is in the direct
line of fire, however, the rest of the room is also dimly illuminated by the
light that scatters off the wall. This scatter is what concerns us
since nothing but the patient's face and jaws is directly in the line of
fire of the beam. The flashlight analogy is inexact since x-ray beams
are better collimated (they form a tighter beam), and much less
x-radiation is scattered from the target than light from the wall because of
the nature of the x-radiation itself. But the analogy still helps you
to understand the concept of scatter versus direct illumination.
Furthermore, the strength of the radiation (or light) hitting any unit area
falls off geometrically depending on the distance from the source of
scatter. Think of the flashlight analogy again. In a very
large, dark room the area of the wall two feet from the bright spot is much
brighter than an area 20 feet away. The "brightness" of the scatter
illumination falls off as the square of the distance. A person
standing 6 feet away from the target receives one ninth (1/9) as much
scatter radiation as a person standing two feet away from the target (6 feet
is 3 times further away than 2 feet, and 3 squared is 9). A person
standing 10 feet away (5 times further away) from the target receives one
twenty-fifth (1/25). Digital X-rays
In
digital radiography, a sensor replaces the film normally used for
traditional radiographs. The sensor plugs into the USB port on an ordinary
computer. The most common type of Intraoral sensors are solid-state
electronic devices called “charged-coupled devices” (CCD). A CCD is
composed of millions of light sensitive cells arranged in a rectangular
array on the face of the sensor. The x-ray photons falling upon the
material in the sensor create an analog (continuous) electric charge. This
signal is converted to digital data that can be understood by the computer.
In this way, the image is converted to millions of tiny digital picture
elements (pixels) which are reassembled by the computer into a coherent
image. CCD's used in dental imaging are essentially the same as the CCD's
used in digital cameras. In your home camera, the CCD contains color filter
arrays for each pixel so the image can be reassembled in color. Since
dental radiographs are monochrome (shades of gray), the dental CCD does not
contain these filters While digital radiography is a newer
technology than the film it replaces, it must be stressed that the image
obtained on a digital x-ray is not necessarily any better than one taken
using standard x-ray film. Most brands of digital x-ray sensor are
sold on the basis of how close they can come to the image produced using
film. Digital technology does require substantially less radiation
than the older D-speed film, but only slightly lower exposures than the
newer E-speed films that are used in most dental offices today.
The largest benefit of digital x-rays is the ability to
computer-enhance the images, making them larger, clearer, or higher contrast
at will. This can be helpful, particularly for dentists with less
experience in reading traditional film, but it is rarely essential in making
a correct diagnosis. Larger, sharper images are helpful in patient
education and in helping patients to accept a treatment plan. There is
no darkroom developing of the images, and the sensor can be moved about in
the mouth more quickly than films, which must be exchanged for new ones for
each shot. Thus digital radiography cuts down on the time it takes to
expose and process a series of intraoral films. For these reasons,
digital radiography is gaining increasing acceptance in dental offices
throughout the US and Europe.
The major dental series
There are three major types of dental x-ray surveys: the
initial full mouth series, the yearly bite wing series, and the Panoramic x-ray
film.
The Full Mouth Series (FMX)

This is an example of the full mouth series we
take in our office. It consists of 4
bite wing films which are taken at an
angle specifically to look for decay, and 14
periapical films
which are
taken from other angles to show the tips of the roots and the supporting
bone. Not all full series look exactly like this one, but they all use
some combination of bite wing and periapical x-rays to show a complete survey of
the teeth and bones. We take a full mouth series on everyone over the age
of 25 at the initial oral examination, and retake it again every 3 to 5
years.
Notice that each tooth is seen in multiple
films. This redundancy is important because it gives us lots of
information we would not otherwise have. Each x-ray is shot from at least
a slightly different angle and the difference in angulation can reveal many
different aspects of the tooth in question. X-rays are not ordinary 2
dimensional pictures. They are actually 3 dimensional shadows.
As you know, shadows may be longer or shorter than the
object which casts them depending on the angle of the light source and the
screen upon which they are projected. They may also be distorted in other
ways as well. The shadow of your hand may show all 5 fingers spread out if
you hold it palm forward facing the light source with the screen directly
behind the back of the hand. On the other hand, the fingers will not be
visible at all if the hand is turned so that the thumb is facing the light
source and the little finger is facing the screen. This happens with
x-rays also, except that the objects which cast the shadow appear translucent on
the film, and it is actually possible to see several objects superimposed over
each other. This is what gives x-rays their 3 dimensional quality, and
this is why it is very helpful to have several views, taken from different
angles, of any given tooth.
The bitewing series

A bitewing series consists of either 2 or 4 films
taken of the back teeth (although some offices take them on front teeth as
well), with the patient biting down so the films contain images of both the top
and bottom teeth. A bitewing series is the minimum set of x-rays that most
offices take to document the internal structure of the teeth and gums. In
our office, we take 2 on children under the age of 12, and 4 on everyone older, supplemented by the other periapical films associated with a full series of x
rays if the patient is over the age of 25.
|
The Panoramic Film (Panorex)

As you can see from the image above, the Panorex is a large,
single x-ray film that shows the entire bony structure of the teeth and
face. It takes a much wider area than any intra oral film showing
structures outside of their range including the
sinuses, and the
Temperomandibular Joints. It shows many pathological structures such as
bony tumors and cysts, as well as the position of the
wisdom teeth. They are
quick and easy to take, and cost a little more than a full series of intraoral
films. In addition to medical and dental uses, panoramic films are
especially good for forensic (legal) purposes in the identification of otherwise
unrecognizable bodies after plane crashes or other mishaps.
Panoramic films differ from the others in
that they are entirely extraoral, which means that the film remains
outside of the mouth while the machine shoots the beam through other
structures from the outside. It fits into a broad category of
medical x-rays called tomographs. A tomograph is a computer
assisted method of focusing x-rays on a particular slice of tissue
and showing that slice on the film as if there were no other structures
outside of that slice. It has a number of real advantages over
the intraoral variety of film discussed above. Since it is entirely
extraoral, it works quite well for gaggers who could not otherwise
tolerate the placement of films inside their mouths. The patient
stands in front of the machine (pictured on the right), and the x-ray tube
swivels around behind his head. Another advantage of the panoramic
film is that
it takes very little
radiation to expose it. The amount of radiation needed to expose
a panoramic x-ray film is about the same as the radiation needed to expose
two intraoral films (periapical or bitewing). The reason for this is
that the film cassette contains an intensifying screen which fluoresces
upon exposure to x-rays and exposes the film with visible light as well as
x-rays.
|
The film on the right is a panoramic view of
a child under the age of 12. You can see the adult teeth that are forming
underneath the baby teeth. You can also see the adult second molars
which are the 4 half formed teeth toward the outside of the film.
The fact that the second molars are not yet erupted is the reason a
dentist or anthropologist can tell that this child is under the age of
12. For a better understanding of this film click
here.
These films have one major disadvantage. The
panoramic film is a lower resolution picture than the intraoral
films. This means that the individual structures which appear on them
(such as the teeth and bone) are somewhat fuzzy, and structures like
caries (tooth decay) and bony trabeculation (the spongelike bone inside the
marrow spaces) are imaged without the fine detail seen on intraoral films. They are
not considered sufficient for the diagnosis of decay, and must be accompanied by
a set of bitewing x-rays if they are to be used as an aid for full diagnostic
purposes. The combination of a set of bitewings and a panoramic film is particularly useful for those patients who are
to be referred for orthodontic consult, and for extraction of wisdom teeth. We use the bitewing/panorex
combination frequently instead of a full series of intraoral films on patients
between the ages of 13 and 30.
The difference
between bitewing and periapical films
| In a bitewing film, all three
elements, the teeth, the film, and the x-ray beam are optimized to give
the most undistorted shadows possible. (The film and teeth are
parallel, and the beam is aimed directly at both; at a 90 degree angle.)
Thus bitewing films afford the most accurate representation of the true
shape of the teeth and associated structures such as decay, fillings,
shape of nerves and bone levels. (To see how the big cavity in the lower tooth was filled, click
here.) |

|
|
A periapical
film like the one on the right is shot from an angle in which the three
elements are not necessarily aligned parallel. Some distortion is
introduced on purpose to be sure that the shadow of the entire tooth or
teeth in question falls on the film. This is done because in many
instances, the space available in the mouth, or the curvature of the roof
of the mouth will not permit parallel placement of the film. This patient
had an abscess and was in pain when the film was shot. (To see how this
situation is treated, click
here.) |
 |
|