• Christoph Stehling, Volker Vieth, Rainald Bachmann, Isabelle Nassenstein, Harald Kugel, Hendrik Kooijman, Walter Heindel, and Roman Fischbach.
• Department of Clinical Radiology, University of Muenster, Münster, Germany. stehlin@uni-muenster.de
• Invest Radiol. 2007 Jun 1; 42 (6): 428-34.

PurposeTo assess the image quality of a high-resolution imaging protocol for the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) at 3.0 T and to compare it with our standard 1.5 T protocol.Materials And MethodsFifteen volunteers without history of TMJ dysfunction underwent bilateral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the TMJ with the jaw in closed and open position. MRI was performed with using a 1.5 T (standard TMJ coil) and 3.0 T (purpose build phased array coil) MR system (Gyroscan Intera 1.5 T and 3.0 T; Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands). Imaging protocols consisted of a parasagittal PDw-TSE sequence and a coronal PDw-TSE sequence in closed mouth position and a sagittal PDw-TSE sequence in open mouth position. Acquisition parameters were adjusted for 3.0 T and voxel size was reduced from 0.29 x 0.29 x 3.0 mm (1.5 T) to 0.15 x 0.15 x 1.5 mm (3.0 T). Total examination time (15 minutes) was similar for both systems. Two observers assessed in consensus delineation, image quality, and artifacts of anatomic landmarks (disk, bilaminar zone, capsular attachment, cortical bone) and ranked them qualitatively on a 5-point scale from 1 (optimal) to 5 (nondiagnostic). Disk position and motility was noted. For CNR analysis, signal intensity from disk and retrodiscal tissue was measured.ResultsDisk position and mobility was identical at both field strengths. All anatomic landmarks were visualized significantly better at 3.0 T. In particular, the capsular attachment was depicted in more detail. Overall image quality was ranked significantly higher at 3.0 T, whereas artifact score was similar. Quantitative evaluation showed significantly higher CNR for 3.0 T (10.23 vs. 8.08, P < 0.0001).ConclusionDepiction of the normal anatomy of the TMJ benefits significantly when investing the higher SNR at 3.0 T into better spatial resolution. We anticipate that this advantage of 3.0 T MRI will also permit a more detailed analysis of capsular and disk pathology.

13 keywords...

hide…