Oral Radiology

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 14–21 | Cite as

Kinetic MRI using high-speed sequence to evaluate swallowing

Comparison with videofluorography
  • Yasutoshi Honda
Original Article



The aim of the present study was to evaluate the ability of high-speed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to dynamically capture images during the swallowing process and compare the results with videofluorography.


Ten subjects underwent both videofluorography and kinetic MRI, which was used in a high-speed sequence mode known as “turbo-fast low-angle shot (turbo-FLASH)” using prune extract (Miki prune®: Miki Corporation) as the contrast medium. Three radiologists assessed 18 agreed-upon items in the kinetic MR images with respect to the oral and pharyngeal phases.


Kinetic MRI provided high-quality images of the direct visualization of the soft tissue during swallowing. In the oral phase, the motion of the lip, tongue, and soft palate and keeping of the contrast medium were scored higher than the equivalent videofluorographic images. The motion of the mandible and the transport to the dorsum of the tongue were evaluated as approximately the same between the two methods, and the import of the contrast medium to the oral cavity, the transport to the pharynx, and the keeping of the contrast medium were inferior to the equivalent videofluorographic images. In the pharyngeal phase, the motion of the soft palate and the tongue base were depicted approximately the same as in the videofluorographic images. The hyoid bone, the elevating and closing of the larynx, the wave of the pharynx, the opening of the pharyngo-esophageal segment, and the passage and keeping of the contrast medium were depicted less clearly than in videofluorography.


Despite some limitations, high-speed kinetic MRI is a promising tool for evaluating swallowing features, as it directly provides anatomical and functional information during the entire course of swallowing using prune extract as the contrast medium.

Key Words

Swallowing Kinetic MRI Videofluorography Contrast medium 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cook IJ, Kahrilas PJ. AGA technical review on management of oropharyngeal dysphagia. Gastroenterology 1999;116:455–478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tanimoto K. Role of videofluorography in the evaluation of dysphagia—from the standpoint of an oral and maxillofacial radiology department. Dent. Radiol. 1999;39:94–105.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dodds WJ, Stewart ET, Logemann JA. Physiology and radiology of the normal oral and pharyngeal phases of swallowing. AJR 1990;154:953–963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suto Y, Kamba M, Kato T. Technical note: dynamic analysis of the pharynx during swallowing using Turbo-FLASH magnetic resonance imaging combined with an oral positive contrast agent—a preliminary study. Br J Radiol. 1995;68:1099–1102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buettner A, Beer A, Hannig C, Settles M. Observation of the swallowing process by application of videofluoroscopy and real-time magnetic resonance imaging—consequences for retronasal aroma stimulation. Chem Senses 2001;26:1211–1219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anagnostara A, Stoeckli S, Weber OM, Kollias SS. Evaluation of the anatomical and functional properties of deglutition with various kinetic high-speed MRI sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;14:194–199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barkhausen J, Goyen M, Winterfeld F, Lauenstein T, Arweiler-Harbeck D, Debatin JF. Visualization of swallowing using real-time TrueFISP MR fluoroscopy. Eur Radiol 2002;12:129–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Putz R, Pabst R. Sobotta, Atlas der Anatomie des Menschen, 20th ed. cd rom version 1.5. Urban & Fischer, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dodds WJ, Stewart ET, Logemann JA. Physiology and radiology of the normal oral and pharyngeal phases of swallowing. AJR 1990;154:953–963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wright RE, Boyd CS, Workman A. Radiation doses to patients during pharyngeal videofluoroscopy. Dysphagia. 1998;13:113–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hiraishi K, Narabayashi I, Fujita O, Yamamoto K, Sagami A, Hisada Y, Saika Y, Adachi I, Hasegawa H. Blueberry juice: preliminary evaluation as an oral contrast agent in gastrointestinal MR imaging. Radiology 1995;194:119–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fujita O, Hiraishi K, Suginobu Y, Takeuchi M and Narabayashi I fundamental studies of oral contrast agents for MR: comparison of manganese agent and iron agent. J Radiol Technol 1996;52:1613–1618. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S Isogai, Y Takehara, H Isoda, et al. MR evaluation of swallowing kinematics using fast recovery single shot fast spin echo imaging. J Mag Res Med 2001;21:34–36 (in Japanese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Society for Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Field of Tumor Biology, Graduate School of Medicine and DentistryOkayama UniversityOkayamaJapan

Personalised recommendations