Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Skeletal Radiology
Published in: Skeletal Radiology 9/2014

01-09-2014 | Scientific Article

Sensitivity of quantitative UTE MRI to the biomechanical property of the temporomandibular joint disc

Authors: Won C. Bae, Reni Biswas, Sheronda Statum, Robert L. Sah, Christine B. Chung

Published in: Skeletal Radiology | Issue 9/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To quantify MR properties of discs from cadaveric human temporomandibular joints (TMJ) using quantitative conventional and ultrashort time-to-echo magnetic resonance imaging (UTE MRI) techniques and to corroborate regional variation in the MR properties with that of biomechanical indentation stiffness.

Methods

This study was exempt from the institutional review board approval. Cadaveric (four donors, two females, 74 ± 10.7 years) TMJs were sliced (n = 14 slices total) sagittally and imaged using quantitative techniques of conventional spin echo T2 (SE T2), UTE T2*, and UTE T1rho. The discs were then subjected to biomechanical indentation testing, which is performed by compressing the tissue with the blunt end of a small solid cylinder. Regional variations in MR and indentation stiffness were correlated. TMJ of a healthy volunteer was also imaged to show in vivo feasibility.

Results

Using the ME SE T2 and the UTE T1rho techniques, a significant (each p < 0.0001) inverse relation between MR and indentation stiffness properties was observed for the data in the lower range of stiffness. However, the strength of correlation was significantly higher (p < 0.05) for UTE T1rho (R2 = 0.42) than SE T2 (R2 = 0.19) or UTE T2* (R2 = 0.02, p = 0.1) techniques.

Conclusion

The UTE T1rho technique, applicable in vivo, facilitated quantitative evaluation of TMJ discs and showed a high sensitivity to biomechanical softening of the TMJ discs. With additional work, the technique may become a useful surrogate measure for loss of biomechanical integrity of TMJ discs reflecting degeneration.
Literature
1.
Alomar X, Medrano J, Cabratosa J, Clavero JA, Lorente M, Serra I, et al. Anatomy of the temporomandibular joint. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2007;28(3):170–83.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Detamore MS, Orfanos JG, Almarza AJ, French MM, Wong ME, Athanasiou KA. Quantitative analysis and comparative regional investigation of the extracellular matrix of the porcine temporomandibular joint disc. Matrix Biol. 2005;24(1):45–57.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Nakano T, Scott PG. Changes in the chemical composition of the bovine temporomandibular joint disc with age. Arch Oral Biol. 1996;41(8–9):845–53.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Nakano T, Sim JS. Glycosaminoglycans from the rooster comb and wattle. Poult Sci. 1989;68(9):1303–6.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Sindelar BJ, Evanko SP, Alonzo T, Herring SW, Wight T. Effects of intraoral splint wear on proteoglycans in the temporomandibular joint disc. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2000;379(1):64–70.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Almarza AJ, Bean AC, Baggett LS, Athanasiou KA. Biochemical analysis of the porcine temporomandibular joint disc. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;44(2):124–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Beek M, Aarnts MP, Koolstra JH, Feilzer AJ, van Eijden TM. Dynamic properties of the human temporomandibular joint disc. J Dent Res. 2001;80(3):876–80.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Beek M, Koolstra JH, van Eijden TMGJ. Human temporomandibular joint disc cartilage as a poroelastic material. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003;18(1):69–76.CrossRef
9.
Chin LP, Aker FD, Zarrinnia K. The viscoelastic properties of the human temporomandibular joint disc. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996;54(3):315–8.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Kang H, Bao G-J, Qi S-N. Biomechanical responses of human temporomandibular joint disc under tension and compression. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;35(9):817–21.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Kim K-W, Wong ME, Helfrick JF, Thomas JB, Athanasiou KA. Biomechanical tissue characterization of the superior joint space of the porcine temporomandibular joint. Ann Biomed Eng. 2003;31(8):924–30.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Tanaka E, van Eijden T. Biomechanical behavior of the temporomandibular joint disc. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2003;14(2):138–50.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Tanaka E, Yamano E, Dalla-Bona DA, Watanabe M, Inubushi T, Shirakura M, et al. Dynamic compressive properties of the mandibular condylar cartilage. J Dent Res. 2006;85(6):571–5.PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
Bae WC, Temple MM, Amiel D, Coutts RD, Niederauer GG, Sah RL. Indentation testing of human cartilage: sensitivity to articular surface degeneration. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48(12):3382–94.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Bae WC, Lewis CW, Levenston ME, Sah RL. Indentation testing of human articular cartilage: effects of probe tip geometry and indentation depth on intra-tissue strain. J Biomech. 2006;39(6):1039–47.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Stowell AW, Gatchel RJ, Wildenstein L. Cost-effectiveness of treatments for temporomandibular disorders: biopsychosocial intervention versus treatment as usual. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007;138(2):202–8.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Goncalves DA, Dal Fabbro AL, Campos JA, Bigal ME, Speciali JG. Symptoms of temporomandibular disorders in the population: an epidemiological study. J Orofac Pain. 24(3):270–78.
19.
Ahmad M, Hollender L, Anderson Q, Kartha K, Ohrbach R, Truelove EL, et al. Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (RDC/TMD): development of image analysis criteria and examiner reliability for image analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107(6):844–60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
20.
Klasser GD, Greene CS. The changing field of temporomandibular disorders: what dentists need to know. J Can Dent Assoc. 2009;75(1):49–53.PubMed
21.
Dimitroulis G. The prevalence of osteoarthrosis in cases of advanced internal derangement of the temporomandibular joint: a clinical, surgical and histological study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;34(4):345–9.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Tominaga K, Hirashima S, Fukuda J. An experimental model of osteoarthrosis of the temporomandibular joint in monkeys. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;40(3):232–7.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Kopp S. Topographical distribution of sulphated glycosaminoglycans in human temporomandibular joint disks. A histochemical study of an autopsy material. J Oral Pathol. 1976;5(5):265–76.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Tanaka E, Shibaguchi T, Tanaka M, Tanne K. Viscoelastic properties of the human temporomandibular joint disc in patients with internal derangement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(9):997–1002.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Ren YF, Westesson PL, Isberg A. Magnetic resonance imaging of the temporomandibular joint: value of pseudodynamic images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1996;81(1):110–23.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Cavalcanti MG, Lew D, Ishimaru T, Ruprecht A. MR imaging of the temporomandibular joint: a validation experiment in vitro. Acad Radiol. 1999;6(11):675–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Chirani RA, Jacq JJ, Meriot P, Roux C. Temporomandibular joint: a methodology of magnetic resonance imaging 3-D reconstruction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;97(6):756–61.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Stehling C, Vieth V, Bachmann R, Nassenstein I, Kugel H, Kooijman H, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the temporomandibular joint: image quality at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla in volunteers. Investig Radiol. 2007;42(6):428–34.CrossRef
29.
Vilanova JC, Barcelo J, Puig J, Remollo S, Nicolau C, Bru C. Diagnostic imaging: magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and ultrasound. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2007;28(3):184–91.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Robson MD, Gatehouse PD, Bydder M, Bydder GM. Magnetic resonance: an introduction to ultrashort TE (UTE) imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27(6):825–46.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Robson MD, Bydder GM. Clinical ultrashort echo time imaging of bone and other connective tissues. NMR Biomed. 2006;19(7):765–80.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Du J, Carl M, Bydder M, Takahashi A, Chung CB, Bydder GM. Qualitative and quantitative ultrashort echo time (UTE) imaging of cortical bone. J Magn Reson. 2010;207(2):304–11.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Du J, Carl M, Diaz E, Takahashi A, Han E, Szeverenyi NM, et al. Ultrashort TE T1rho (UTE T1rho) imaging of the Achilles tendon and meniscus. Magn Reson Med. 2010;64(3):834–42.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Wheaton AJ, Dodge GR, Elliott DM, Nicoll SB, Reddy R. Quantification of cartilage biomechanical and biochemical properties via T1rho magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54(5):1087–93.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Regatte RR, Akella SV, Lonner JH, Kneeland JB, Reddy R. T1rho relaxation mapping in human osteoarthritis (OA) cartilage: comparison of T1rho with T2. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23(4):547–53.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zarins ZA, Bolbos RI, Pialat JB, Link TM, Li X, Souza RB, et al. Cartilage and meniscus assessment using T1rho and T2 measurements in healthy subjects and patients with osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2010;18(11):1408–16.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
37.
Blumenkrantz G, Zuo J, Li X, Kornak J, Link TM, Majumdar S. In vivo 3.0-Tesla magnetic resonance T1rho and T2 relaxation mapping in subjects with intervertebral disc degeneration and clinical symptoms. Magn Reson Med. 2010;63(5):1193–200.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
38.
Yuya PA, Amborn EK, Beatty MW, Turner JA. Evaluating anisotropic properties in the porcine temporomandibular joint disc using nanoindentation. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38(7):2428–37.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Luder HU. Frequency and distribution of articular tissue features in adult human mandibular condyles: a semiquantitative light microscopic study. Anat Rec. 1997;248(1):18–28.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Bae WC, Law AW, Amiel D, Sah RL. Sensitivity of indentation testing to step-off edges and interface integrity in cartilage repair. Ann Biomed Eng. 2004;32:360–9.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Carlsson G, LeResche L. Epidemiology of temporomandibular disorders. In: Sessle B, Bryant P, Dionne R, editors. Temporomandibular disorders and related pain conditions. Seattle: IASP Press; 1995.
42.
Clement C, Bravetti P, Plenat F, Foliguet B, Haddioui AE, Gaudy JF, et al. Quantitative analysis of the elastic fibres in the human temporomandibular articular disc and its attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;35(12):1120–6.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Foucart JM, Pajoni D, Carpentier P, Pharaboz C. MRI study of temporomandibular joint disk behavior in chilren with hyperpropulsion appliances. Orthod Fr. 1998;69(1):79–91.PubMed
44.
Gold DM. Direct measurement of prepulse suppression by use of a plasma shutter. Opt Lett. 1994;19(23):2006–8.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Rao VM, Bacelar MT. MR imaging of the temporomandibular joint. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2004;14(4):761–75.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Landesberg R, Takeuchi E, Puzas JE. Cellular, biochemical and molecular characterization of the bovine temporomandibular joint disc. Arch Oral Biol. 1996;41(8–9):761–7.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Duyn J, van Gelderen P, Li T, de Zwart J, Koretsky A, Fukunaga M. High-field MRI of brain cortical substructure based on signal phase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(28):11796–801.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
48.
Bae W, Dwek J, Znamirowski R, Statum S, Hermida J, D’Lima D, et al. Ultrashort TE MRI of the Osteochondral junction of the knee at 3T: identification of anatomic structures contributing to signal intensity. Proceedings 17th Scientific Meeting, International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine; 2009 April; Honolulu; 2009. p. 78.
49.
Helms CA, Kaban LB, McNeill C, Dodson T. Temporomandibular joint: morphology and signal intensity characteristics of the disk at MR imaging. Radiology. 1989;172(3):817–20.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Berkovitz BK, Pacy J. Age changes in the cells of the intra-articular disc of the temporomandibular joints of rats and marmosets. Arch Oral Biol. 2000;45(11):987–95.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Hayakawa Y, Kober C, Otonari-Yamamoto M, Otonari T, Wakoh M, Sano T. An approach for three-dimensional visualization using high-resolution MRI of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007;36(6):341–7.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Wang EY, Mulholland TP, Pramanik BK, Nusbaum AO, Babb J, Pavone AG, et al. Dynamic sagittal half-Fourier acquired single-shot turbo spin-echo MR imaging of the temporomandibular joint: initial experience and comparison with sagittal oblique proton-attenuation images. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28(6):1126–32.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Lyyra T, Kiviranta I, Vaatainen U, Helminen HJ, Jurvelin JS. In vivo characterization of indentation stiffness of articular cartilage in the normal human knee. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999;48(4):482–7.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Martin I, Obradovic B, Freed LE, Vunjak-Novakovic G. Method for quantitative analysis of glycosaminoglycan distribution in cultured natural and engineered cartilage. Ann Biomed Eng. 1999;27(5):656–62.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Milam SB, Klebe RJ, Triplett RG, Herbert D. Characterization of the extracellular matrix of the primate temporomandibular joint. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;49(4):381–91.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Sah RL, Chen AC, Grodzinsky AJ, Trippel SB. Differential effects of bFGF and IGF-I on matrix metabolism in calf and adult bovine cartilage explants. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1994;308:137–47.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Peterson L, Brittberg M, Kiviranta I, Akerlund EL, Lindahl A. Autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Biomechanics and long-term durability. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30:2–12.PubMed
58.
Duvvuri U, Reddy R, Patel SD, Kaufman JH, Kneeland JB, Leigh JS. T1rho-relaxation in articular cartilage: effects of enzymatic degradation. Magn Reson Med. 1997;38(6):863–7.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Samosky JT, Burstein D, Eric Grimson W, Howe R, Martin S, Gray ML. Spatially-localized correlation of dGEMRIC-measured GAG distribution and mechanical stiffness in the human tibial plateau. J Orthop Res. 2005;23(1):93–101.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Yokoo T, Bae WC, Hamilton G, Karimi A, Borgstede JP, Bowen BC, et al. A quantitative approach to sequence and image weighting. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34(3):317–31.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sensitivity of quantitative UTE MRI to the biomechanical property of the temporomandibular joint disc
Authors
Won C. Bae
Reni Biswas
Sheronda Statum
Robert L. Sah
Christine B. Chung
Publication date
01-09-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Skeletal Radiology / Issue 9/2014
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-1901-y

Other articles of this Issue 9/2014

Skeletal Radiology 9/2014 Go to the issue

Perspective

Perspective on imaging services at the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games

Case Report

Non-traumatic hypertrophic callus of the fibula mimicking osteosarcoma in osteogenesis imperfecta type V: a case report

Scientific Article

MRI of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: imaging appearance with and without the use of human recombinant bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2)

Case Report

Stress injury of the rib in a swimmer

Case Report

Subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma: MRI features and literature review

Case Report

Magnetic resonance imaging of abnormal shoulder pain following influenza vaccination