IADR Abstract Archives
Qualitative Comparison Between 0.55T and 1.5T Temporomandibular Joint MRIs
Objectives: MRI is the gold standard for imaging of the soft tissue components of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), but scanners at established 1.5T field strength are large, expensive, and usually not where dental care is provided. Our aim was to compare images obtained from a more accessible new 0.55T scanner with images produced from a standard 1.5T scanner.
Methods: METHODS
Six raters (1 neuroradiologist, 1 oral radiologist, 4 orofacial pain (OFP) specialists) evaluated 40 different imaging stacks, presented in a blinded randomized fashion, obtained on a 0.55T scanner equipped with a custom-built surface coil for dental applications and 1.5T scanner with a standard coil setup. Standard parasagittal and paracoronal proton-density, with and without fat saturation, as well as T2-weighted images from 5 healthy participants were acquired on both scanners. Various hard and soft tissue anatomical components of the TMJs necessary to derive diagnoses, as well as image quality parameters (noise, resolution, contrast) were assessed using a 3-point scale (0=unacceptable, 1=acceptable, 2=excellent). Chi square tests were used to determine differences between scanners with significance set at ≤0.05.
Results: The oral radiologist and one OFP specialist visualized more structures using 0.55T scanner for both hard (p<0.001, p=0.01 respectively) and soft anatomy (p<0.001 for both). Additionally, another OFP specialist showed a significant difference for hard tissues (p=0.02) and the neuroradiologist showed a significant difference for soft tissues (p=0.004), both favoring the 0.55T scanner. There was no difference observed between modalities with the other raters. For the 3 image quality parameters, the oral radiologist showed a significant difference (p=0.04) in favor of 0.55T scanner contrast settings. No other differences were detected.
Conclusions: This small study demonstrates that 0.55T scanner produced images that seem to be at least comparable to a standard clinical 1.5T MRI scanner for evaluation of TMJs.
Methods: METHODS
Six raters (1 neuroradiologist, 1 oral radiologist, 4 orofacial pain (OFP) specialists) evaluated 40 different imaging stacks, presented in a blinded randomized fashion, obtained on a 0.55T scanner equipped with a custom-built surface coil for dental applications and 1.5T scanner with a standard coil setup. Standard parasagittal and paracoronal proton-density, with and without fat saturation, as well as T2-weighted images from 5 healthy participants were acquired on both scanners. Various hard and soft tissue anatomical components of the TMJs necessary to derive diagnoses, as well as image quality parameters (noise, resolution, contrast) were assessed using a 3-point scale (0=unacceptable, 1=acceptable, 2=excellent). Chi square tests were used to determine differences between scanners with significance set at ≤0.05.
Results: The oral radiologist and one OFP specialist visualized more structures using 0.55T scanner for both hard (p<0.001, p=0.01 respectively) and soft anatomy (p<0.001 for both). Additionally, another OFP specialist showed a significant difference for hard tissues (p=0.02) and the neuroradiologist showed a significant difference for soft tissues (p=0.004), both favoring the 0.55T scanner. There was no difference observed between modalities with the other raters. For the 3 image quality parameters, the oral radiologist showed a significant difference (p=0.04) in favor of 0.55T scanner contrast settings. No other differences were detected.
Conclusions: This small study demonstrates that 0.55T scanner produced images that seem to be at least comparable to a standard clinical 1.5T MRI scanner for evaluation of TMJs.