Controversial Aspects of Diagnostics and Therapy of Arthritis of the Temporomandibular Joint in Rheumatoid and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: An Analysis of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Recommendations Based on an Interdisciplinary Guideline Project

Introduction: Due to potentially severe sequelae (impaired growth, condylar resorption, and ankylosis) early diagnosis of chronic rheumatic arthritis of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and timely onset of therapy are essential. Aim: Owing to very limited evidence the aim of the study was to identify and discuss controversial topics in the guideline development to promote further focused research. Methods: Through a systematic literature search, 394 out of 3771 publications were included in a German interdisciplinary guideline draft. Two workgroups (1: oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2: interdisciplinary) voted on 77 recommendations/statements, in 2 independent anonymized and blinded consensus phases (Delphi process). Results: The voting results were relatively homogenous, except for a greater proportion of abstentions amongst the interdisciplinary group (p < 0.001). Eighty four percent of recommendations/statements were approved in the first round, 89% with strong consensus. Fourteen recommendations/statements (18.2%) required a prolonged consensus phase and further discussion. Discussion: Contrast-enhanced MRI was confirmed as the method of choice for the diagnosis of TMJ arthritis. Intraarticular corticosteroid injection is to be limited to therapy refractory cases and single injection only. In adults, alloplastic joint replacement is preferable to autologous replacement. In children/adolescents, autologous reconstruction may be performed lacking viable alternatives. Alloplastic options are currently still considered experimental

Use of dental MRI for radiation-free guided dental implant planning: a prospective, in vivo study of accuracy and reliability

Objectives!#!To evaluate the accuracy and reliability of dental MRI for static guided implant surgery planning.!##!Materials and methods!#!In this prospective study, a 0.4-mm isotropic, artifact-suppressed, 3T MRI protocol was used for implant planning and surgical guide production in participants in need of dental implants. Two dentists decided on treatment plan. Surgical guides were placed intraorally during a subsequent reference cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan. Inter-rater and inter-modality agreement were assessed by Cohen's kappa. For each participant, dental MRI and CBCT datasets were co-registered to determine three-dimensional and angular deviations between planned and surgically guided implant positions.!##!Results!#!Forty-five implants among 30 study participants were planned and evaluated (17 women, 13 men, mean age 56.9 ± 13.1 years). Inter-rater agreement (mean κ 0.814; range 0.704-0.927) and inter-modality agreement (mean κ 0.879; range 0.782-0.901) were both excellent for the dental MRI-based treatment plans. Mean three-dimensional deviations were 1.1 ± 0.7 (entry point) and 1.3 ± 0.7 mm (apex). Mean angular deviation was 2.4 ± 1.5°. CBCT-based adjustments of MRI plans were necessary for implant position in 29.5% and for implant axis in 6.8% of all implant sites. Changes were larger in the group with shortened dental arches compared with those for tooth gaps. Except for one implant site, all guides were suitable for clinical use.!##!Conclusion!#!This feasibility study indicates that dental MRI is reliable and sufficiently accurate for surgical guide production. Nevertheless, more studies are needed to increase its accuracy before it can be used for implant planning outside clinical trials.!##!Key points!#!• An excellent reliability for the dental MRI-based treatment plans as well as agreement between dental MRI-based and CBCT-based (reference standard) decisions were noted. • Ideal implant position was not reached in all cases by dental MRI plans. • For all but one implant site surgical guides derived from dental MRI were sufficiently accurate to perform implant placement (mean three-dimensional deviations were 1.1 ± 0.7 (entry point) and 1.3 ± 0.7 mm (apex); mean angular deviation was 2.4 ± 1.5°)

3D cephalometric analysis using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: validation of accuracy and reproducibility

Abstract The aim of this study was to validate geometric accuracy and in vivo reproducibility of landmark-based cephalometric measurements using high-resolution 3D Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at 3 Tesla. For accuracy validation, 96 angular and 96 linear measurements were taken on a phantom in 3 different positions. In vivo MRI scans were performed on 3 volunteers in five head positions. For each in vivo scan, 27 landmarks were determined from which 19 angles and 26 distances were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using Bland-Altman analysis, the two one-sided tests procedure and repeated measures one-way analysis of variance. In comparison to ground truth, all MRI-based phantom measurements showed statistical equivalence (p  0.05). Ranges between maximum and minimum in vivo values were consistently smaller than 2° and 2 mm, respectively (average ranges: 0.88°/0.87 mm). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that accurate and reproducible 3D cephalometric analysis can be performed without exposure to ionizing radiation using MRI

Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging artifacts caused by fixed orthodontic CAD/CAM retainers—an in vitro study

Objectives!#!Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image quality can be severely impaired by artifacts caused by fixed orthodontic retainers. In clinical practice, there is a trend towards using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) retainers. This study aimed to quantify MRI artifacts produced by these novel CAD/CAM retainers.!##!Material and methods!#!Three CAD/CAM retainers and a stainless-steel retainer ('Twistflex'; clinical reference standard) were scanned in vitro at 3-T MRI using a high-resolution 3D sequence. The artifact diameters and three-dimensional artifact volumes (AV) were determined for all mandibular (AV!##!Results!#!Twistflex caused large artifact volumes (AV!##!Conclusion!#!All CAD/CAM retainers caused substantially smaller volumes of MRI artifacts compared to Twistflex. Grade-5 titanium and nickel-titanium CAD/CAM retainers showed the smallest artifact volumes.!##!Clinical relevance!#!CAD/CAM retainers made from titanium or nickel-titanium may not relevantly impair image quality in head/neck and dental MRI. Artifacts caused by cobalt-chromium CAD/CAM retainers may mask nearby dental/periodontal structures. In contrast, the large artifacts caused by Twistflex are likely to severely impair diagnosis of oral and adjacent pathologies

Geometric Reproducibility of Three-Dimensional Oral Implant Planning Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

This study aimed to investigate the geometric reproducibility of three-dimensional (3D) implant planning based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Four raters used a backward-planning approach based on CBCT imaging and standard software to position 41 implants in 27 patients. Implant planning was repeated, and the first and second plans were analyzed for geometric differences regarding implant tip, entry-level, and axis. The procedure was then repeated for MRI data of the same patients. Thus, 656 implant plans were available for analysis of intra-rater reproducibility. For both imaging modalities, the second-round 3D implant plans were re-evaluated regarding inter-rater reproducibility. Differences between the modalities were analyzed using paired t-tests. Intra- and inter-rater reproducibility were higher for CBCT than for MRI. Regarding intra-rater deviations, mean values for MRI were 1.7 ± 1.1 mm/1.5 ± 1.1 mm/5.5 ± 4.2° at implant tip/entry-level/axis. For CBCT, corresponding values were 1.3 ± 0.8 mm/1 ± 0.6 mm/4.5 ± 3.1°. Inter-rater comparisons revealed mean values of 2.2 ± 1.3 mm/1.7 ± 1 mm/7.5 ± 4.9° for MRI, and 1.7 ± 1 mm/1.2 ± 0.7 mm/6 ± 3.7° for CBCT. CBCT-based implant planning was more reproducible than MRI. Nevertheless, more research is needed to increase planning reproducibility—for both modalities—thereby standardizing 3D implant planning

Lateral cephalometric analysis for treatment planning in orthodontics based on MRI compared with radiographs: A feasibility study in children and adolescents.

The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is equivalent to lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCR, "gold standard") in cephalometric analysis.The applied MRI technique was optimized for short scanning time, high resolution, high contrast and geometric accuracy. Prior to orthodontic treatment, 20 patients (mean age ± SD, 13.95 years ± 5.34) received MRI and LCR. MRI datasets were postprocessed into lateral cephalograms. Cephalometric analysis was performed twice by two independent observers for both modalities with an interval of 4 weeks. Eight bilateral and 10 midsagittal landmarks were identified, and 24 widely used measurements (14 angles, 10 distances) were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed by using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis and two one-sided tests (TOST) within the predefined equivalence margin of ± 2°/mm.Geometric accuracy of the MRI technique was confirmed by phantom measurements. Mean intraobserver ICC were 0.977/0.975 for MRI and 0.975/0.961 for LCR. Average interobserver ICC were 0.980 for MRI and 0.929 for LCR. Bland-Altman analysis showed high levels of agreement between the two modalities, bias range (mean ± SD) was -0.66 to 0.61 mm (0.06 ± 0.44) for distances and -1.33 to 1.14° (0.06 ± 0.71) for angles. Except for the interincisal angle (p = 0.17) all measurements were statistically equivalent (p < 0.05).This study demonstrates feasibility of orthodontic treatment planning without radiation exposure based on MRI. High-resolution isotropic MRI datasets can be transformed into lateral cephalograms allowing reliable measurements as applied in orthodontic routine with high concordance to the corresponding measurements on LCR

Bland-Altman plots show the differences between the measurements on LCR and lateral MRI cephalograms.

<p>Solid lines represent the mean of all differences (bias), dashed lines represent the 95% limits of agreement. Exemplary measurements according to Steiner’s analysis [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0174524#pone.0174524.ref014" target="_blank">14</a>] are shown in this figure: (a) SNA-angle, (b) SNB-angle, (c) ANB-angle, (d) SND-angle, (e) Ui/NA-angle, (f) Is/NA-distance, (g) Li/NB-angle, (h) Ii/NB-distance, (i) Pg/NB-distance, (j) Ui/Li-angle, (k) SN/OcP-angle and (l) SN/GoGn-angle.</p

Cephalometric landmarks used in the present study.

<p>A total of 10 midsagittal (blue marked) and 8 bilateral (red marked) landmarks were included in cephalometric analysis: S = Sella; N = Nasion; ANS = Anterior nasal spine; PNS = Posterior nasal spine; A = Point A (most concave point of anterior maxilla); B = Point B (most concave point of mandibular symphysis); Is = Incision superius; Ii = Incision inferius; As = Apex superius; Ai = Apex inferius; Pg = Pogonion (most anterior point of mandibular symphysis); Gn = Gnathion (midpoint between Pg and Me); Me = Menton (most inferior point of mandibular symphysis); D = Point D (geometric center of the symphysis); Go = Gonion; tGo = Gonion tangent point (intersection between the mandibular line and the ramus line); Ar = (junction between inferior surface of the cranial base and the posterior border of the ascending rami of the mandible); ppOcc = posterior point of occlusion.</p

Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for lateral cephalometric measurements.

<p>Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for lateral cephalometric measurements.</p