Markus Kopp, Marco Wiesmueller, Mayte Buchbender, Marco Kesting, Armin M Nagel, Matthias S May, Michael Uder, Frank W Roemer, Rafael Heiss
{"title":"MRI of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders: A Comparative Study of 0.55 T and 1.5 T MRI.","authors":"Markus Kopp, Marco Wiesmueller, Mayte Buchbender, Marco Kesting, Armin M Nagel, Matthias S May, Michael Uder, Frank W Roemer, Rafael Heiss","doi":"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are common and may cause persistent functional limitations and pain. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 1.5 and 3 T is commonly applied for the evaluation of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). No evidence is available regarding the feasibility of modern low-field MRI for the assessment of TMDs. The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate the image quality (IQ) of 0.55 T MRI in direct comparison with 1.5 T MRI.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventeen patients (34 TMJs) with suspected intraarticular TMDs were enrolled, and both 0.55 and 1.5 T MRI were performed on the same day. Two senior readers independently evaluated the IQ focusing on the conspicuity of disc morphology (DM), disc position (DP), and osseous joint morphology (OJM) for each joint. We analyzed the IQ and degree of artifacts using a 4-point Likert scale (LS) at both field strengths. A fully sufficient IQ was defined as an LS score of ≥3. Nonparametric Wilcoxon test for related samples was used for statistical comparison.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median IQ for the DM and OJM at 0.55 T was inferior to that at 1.5 T (DM: 3 [interquartile range {IQR}, 3-4] vs 4 [IQR, 4-4]; OJM: 3 [IQR, 3-4] vs 4 [IQR 4-4]; each P < 0.001). For DP, the IQ was comparable (4 [IQR 3-4] vs 4 [IQR 4-4]; P > 0.05). A sufficient diagnostic IQ was maintained for the DM, DP, and OJM in 92% of the cases at 0.55 T and 100% at 1.5 T. Minor image artifacts (LS score of ≥3) were more prevalent at 0.55 T (29%) than at 1.5 T (12%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Magnetic resonance imaging of the TMJ at 0.55 T yields a lower IQ than does MRI at 1.5 T but maintains sufficient diagnostic confidence in the majority of patients. Further improvements are needed for reliable clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":14486,"journal":{"name":"Investigative Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446537/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001008","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are common and may cause persistent functional limitations and pain. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 1.5 and 3 T is commonly applied for the evaluation of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). No evidence is available regarding the feasibility of modern low-field MRI for the assessment of TMDs. The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate the image quality (IQ) of 0.55 T MRI in direct comparison with 1.5 T MRI.
Materials and methods: Seventeen patients (34 TMJs) with suspected intraarticular TMDs were enrolled, and both 0.55 and 1.5 T MRI were performed on the same day. Two senior readers independently evaluated the IQ focusing on the conspicuity of disc morphology (DM), disc position (DP), and osseous joint morphology (OJM) for each joint. We analyzed the IQ and degree of artifacts using a 4-point Likert scale (LS) at both field strengths. A fully sufficient IQ was defined as an LS score of ≥3. Nonparametric Wilcoxon test for related samples was used for statistical comparison.
Results: The median IQ for the DM and OJM at 0.55 T was inferior to that at 1.5 T (DM: 3 [interquartile range {IQR}, 3-4] vs 4 [IQR, 4-4]; OJM: 3 [IQR, 3-4] vs 4 [IQR 4-4]; each P < 0.001). For DP, the IQ was comparable (4 [IQR 3-4] vs 4 [IQR 4-4]; P > 0.05). A sufficient diagnostic IQ was maintained for the DM, DP, and OJM in 92% of the cases at 0.55 T and 100% at 1.5 T. Minor image artifacts (LS score of ≥3) were more prevalent at 0.55 T (29%) than at 1.5 T (12%).
Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging of the TMJ at 0.55 T yields a lower IQ than does MRI at 1.5 T but maintains sufficient diagnostic confidence in the majority of patients. Further improvements are needed for reliable clinical application.
目的：颞下颌关节紊乱 (TMD) 是一种常见疾病，可能导致持续的功能障碍和疼痛。1.5 和 3 T 的磁共振成像（MRI）通常用于评估颞下颌关节（TMJ）。关于现代低场磁共振成像评估 TMD 的可行性，目前尚无证据。这项前瞻性研究的目的是评估 0.55 T MRI 与 1.5 T MRI 直接比较的图像质量（IQ）：这项前瞻性研究的目的是评估 0.55 T MRI 与 1.5 T MRI 直接对比的图像质量（IQ）。两名资深读者独立评估智商，重点是每个关节的椎间盘形态（DM）、椎间盘位置（DP）和骨关节形态（OJM）的清晰度。我们使用 4 点李克特量表（LS）分析了两种视野强度下的智商和伪影程度。完全足够的 IQ 定义为 LS 分数≥3。统计比较采用相关样本的非参数 Wilcoxon 检验：0.55T时，DM和OJM的中位智商低于1.5T时（DM：3 [四分位数间距{IQR}，3-4] vs 4 [四分位数间距，4-4]；OJM：3 [四分位数间距，3-4] vs 4 [四分位数间距，4-4]；各P <0.001）。DP的诊断智商相当（4 [IQR 3-4] vs 4 [IQR 4-4]；P > 0.05）。在 0.55 T 和 1.5 T 下，分别有 92% 和 100% 的病例对 DM、DP 和 OJM 保持足够的诊断智商：颞下颌关节 0.55 T 磁共振成像的智商低于 1.5 T 磁共振成像，但对大多数患者仍有足够的诊断信心。可靠的临床应用还需要进一步改进。
期刊介绍：
Investigative Radiology publishes original, peer-reviewed reports on clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, and related modalities. Emphasis is on early and timely publication. Primarily research-oriented, the journal also includes a wide variety of features of interest to clinical radiologists.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
