Longterm Outcomes of Temporomandibular Joints in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: 17 Years of Followup of a Nordic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of orofacial symptoms, dysfunctions, and deformities of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) 17 years after disease onset. METHODS: Drawn from a prospective, population-based Nordic JIA cohort with disease onset from 1997 to 2000, 420 consecutive cases were eligible for orofacial evaluation of TMJ involvement. The followup visit included demographic data, a standardized clinical orofacial examination, and full-face cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). For comparison, 200 age-matched healthy controls were used. RESULTS: Of 420 eligible participants with JIA, 265 (63%) were included (mean age 23.5 ± 4.2 yrs) and completed a standardized clinical orofacial examination. Of these, 245 had a full-face CBCT performed. At least 1 orofacial symptom was reported by 33%. Compared to controls, the JIA group significantly more often reported TMJ pain, TMJ morning stiffness, and limitation on chewing. Further, among participants reporting complaints, the number of symptoms was also higher in JIA. The mean maximal incisal opening was lower in the JIA group (p < 0.001), and TMJ pain on palpation was more frequent. Condylar deformities and/or erosions were observed in 61% as assessed by CBCT, showing bilateral changes in about 70%. Risk factors of condylar deformities were orofacial dysfunction or biologic treatment; enthesitis-related arthritis was protective. CONCLUSION: This study of the longterm consequences of TMJ involvement in a population-based JIA cohort reports persistence of comprehensive symptoms, dysfunctions, and damage of the TMJ into adulthood. We suggest interdisciplinary followup of JIA patients also in adulthood.

An ex vivo study of automated motion artefact correction and the impact on cone beam CT image quality and interpretability.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of head motion artefacts and an automated artefact-correction system on cone beam CT (CBCT) image quality and interpretability for simulated diagnostic tasks. METHODS: A partially dentate human skull was mounted on a robot simulating four types of head movement (anteroposterior translation, nodding, lateral rotation, and tremor), at three distances (0.75, 1.5, and 3 mm) based on two movement patterns (skull returning/not returning to the initial position). Two diagnostic tasks were simulated: dental implant planning and detection of a periapical lesion. Three CBCT units were used to examine the skull during the movements and no-motion (control): Cranex 3Dx (CRA), Orthophos SL 3D (ORT), and X1 without (X1wo) and with (X1wi) an automated motion artefact-correction system. For each diagnostic task, 88 examinations were performed. Three observers, blinded to unit and movement, scored image quality: presence of stripe artefacts (present/absent), overall unsharpness (present/absent), and image interpretability (interpretable/non-interpretable). κ statistics assessed interobserver agreement, and descriptive statistics summarized the findings. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement for image interpretability was good (average κ = 0.68). Regarding dental implant planning, X1wi images were interpretable by all observers, while for the other units mainly the cases with tremor were non-interpretable. Regarding detection of a periapical lesion, besides tremor, most of the 3 mm movements based on the "not returning" pattern were also non-interpretable for CRA, ORT, and X1wo. For X1wi, two observers scored 1.5 mm tremor and one observer scored 3 mm tremor as non-interpretable. CONCLUSIONS: The automated motion artefact-correction system significantly enhanced CBCT image quality and interpretability.

Accuracy of video observation and a three-dimensional head tracking system for detecting and quantifying robot-simulated head movements in cone beam computed tomography.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of detecting robot-simulated head movements using video observation (VO) and 3-dimensional head tracking (HT) in a cone beam computed tomography examination setup. STUDY DESIGN: A mannequin head was mounted on a robot that was programmed to simulate patient head movements. Six types of movement (tremor, nodding, lateral rotation, lifting, swallowing, and anteroposterior translation), 3 distances (0.25, 1, and 5 mm), and 2 speeds (1 and 5 mm/s) were tested in triplicate (108 examinations). An additional 18 videos and HT of no-motion served as controls for a total of 126 examinations. Three blinded observers viewed video recordings of the examinations, scoring whether the head moved and the movement type. HT provided quantitative measures of movement distance. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for movement detection by VO and HT were calculated, related to true type, distance, and speed of movement. Differences between the true and the measured movement distances were assessed for HT. RESULTS: VO movement detection presented accuracy of 0.86, sensitivity of 0.85, and specificity of 0.94. Anteroposterior translation (33.3%) and 0.25 mm movements (41.7%) were often not detected by VO. HT correctly detected all cases (accuracy = 1). HT presented small differences between the true and the measured movement distances (average 20-54 µm). CONCLUSIONS: VO missed 41.7% of the 0.25 mm movements. HT correctly detected all movements and quantified movements with an average error <55 µm.

Radiographic signs of pathology determining removal of an impacted mandibular third molar assessed in a panoramic image or CBCT.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) compare pathological findings related to the mandibular third molar in panoramic images (PAN) and CBCT; (2) estimate the frequency of removals if pathological findings were indicative; and (3) assess factors in PAN associated with resorption and marginal bone loss at the second molar as observed in CBCT. METHODS: 379 mandibular third molars were examined with PAN and CBCT. Four observers registered resorption and marginal bone loss at the second molar and increased periodontal space at the third molar in both imaging modalities. Agreement between PAN and CBCT, frequency of removals based on pathological findings in either of the two modalities and interobserver reproducibility was calculated. Logistic regression analyses assessed factors in PAN, which could predict marginal bone loss and resorption observed in CBCT. RESULTS: Agreement between PAN and CBCT: resorption 54-74%; marginal bone loss 66-85%; and increased periodontal space 92-97%. Removals based on CBCT and PAN: 58-71% and 36-65%. Interobserver percentage accordance and kappa values ranged from 57 to 98% and 0.10-0.91 for PAN and 61-97% and 0.22-0.78 for CBCT, respectively. Mesioangulated/horizontally positioned third molars were associated with marginal bone loss [odds ratio (OR) = 7.0-31.3; p < 0.001] and resorption (OR = 2.9-35.6; p < 0.001) in CBCT. Overprojection between the third and the second molars in PAN predicted resorption observed in CBCT (OR = 5.6-21.2; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Pathology associated with the third molar is more often observed in CBCT than in PAN. More third molars would be removed if pathological findings are based on CBCT. Mesioangulated/horizontally positioned third molars overprojecting the cervical/root part of the second molar in PAN are strongly associated with pathology observed in CBCT.

Detection of patient movement during CBCT examination using video observation compared with an accelerometer-gyroscope tracking system.

OBJECTIVES: To compare video observation (VO) with a novel three-dimensional registration method, based on an accelerometer-gyroscope (AG) system, to detect patient movement during CBCT examination. The movements were further analyzed according to complexity and patient age. METHODS: In 181 patients (118 females/63 males; age average 30 years, range: 9-84 years), 206 CBCT examinations were performed, which were video-recorded during examination. An AG was, at the same time, attached to the patient head to track head position in three dimensions. Three observers scored patient movement (yes/no) by VO. AG provided movement data on the x-, y- and z-axes. Thresholds for AG-based registration were defined at 0.5, 1, 2, 3 and 4 mm (movement distance). Movement detected by VO was compared with that registered by AG, according to movement complexity (uniplanar vs multiplanar, as defined by AG) and patient age (≤15, 16-30 and ≥31 years). RESULTS: According to AG, movement ≥0.5 mm was present in 160 (77.7%) examinations. According to VO, movement was present in 46 (22.3%) examinations. One VO-detected movement was not registered by AG. Overall, VO did not detect 71.9% of the movements registered by AG at the 0.5-mm threshold. At a movement distance ≥4 mm, 20% of the AG-registered movements were not detected by VO. Multiplanar movements such as lateral head rotation (72.1%) and nodding/swallowing (52.6%) were more often detected by VO in comparison with uniplanar movements, such as head lifting (33.6%) and anteroposterior translation (35.6%), at the 0.5-mm threshold. The prevalence of patients who move was highest in patients younger than 16 years (64.3% for VO and 92.3% for AG-based registration at the 0.5-mm threshold). CONCLUSIONS: AG-based movement registration resulted in a higher prevalence of patient movement during CBCT examination than VO-based registration. Also, AG-registered multiplanar movements were more frequently detected by VO than uniplanar movements. The prevalence of patients who move was highest in patients younger than 16 years.

Radiographic methods used before removal of mandibular third molars among randomly selected general dental clinics.

OBJECTIVES: To assess radiographic methods and diagnostically sufficient images used before removal of mandibular third molars among randomly selected general dental clinics. Furthermore, to assess factors predisposing for an additional radiographic examination. METHODS: 2 observers visited 18 randomly selected clinics in Denmark and studied patient files, including radiographs of patients who had their mandibular third molar(s) removed. The radiographic unit and type of receptor were registered. A diagnostically sufficient image was defined as the whole tooth and mandibular canal were displayed in the radiograph (yes/no). Overprojection between the tooth and mandibular canal (yes/no) and patient-reported inferior alveolar nerve sensory disturbances (yes/no) were recorded. Regression analyses tested if overprojection between the third molar and the mandibular canal and an insufficient intraoral image predisposed for additional radiographic examination(s). RESULTS: 1500 mandibular third molars had been removed; 1090 had intraoral, 468 had panoramic and 67 had CBCT examination. 1000 teeth were removed after an intraoral examination alone, 433 after panoramic examination and 67 after CBCT examination. 90 teeth had an additional examination after intraoral. Overprojection between the tooth and mandibular canal was a significant factor (p < 0.001, odds ratio = 3.56) for an additional examination. 63.7% of the intraoral images were sufficient and 36.3% were insufficient, with no significant difference between images performed with phosphor plates and solid-state sensors (p = 0.6). An insufficient image predisposed for an additional examination (p = 0.008, odds ratio = 1.8) but was only performed in 11% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Most mandibular third molars were removed based on an intraoral examination although 36.3% were insufficient.

Movement characteristics in young patients and the impact on CBCT image quality.

OBJECTIVES: To assess patient movement characteristics in children and young adults and the impact on CBCT image quality. METHODS: During 33 CBCT examinations, the patients (age: average, 14 years; range, 9-25 years) who had moved were identified by video observation [movement group (MG)]. The CBCT data sets were matched with those of 33 non-moving patients according to age, diagnostic task, examined region, field of view and voxel resolution [non-movement group (N-MG)]. Three observers scored the videos of MG, regarding motional state second by second (moving/non-moving), and movement characteristics: duration (in seconds), complexity (uniplanar or multiplanar) and distance (<3/≥3 ≤ 10/>10 mm). The observers blindly assessed axial sections of the 66 examinations individually, categorizing the image quality (appropriate/acceptable/inappropriate). Next, the observers blindly assessed axial sections of the matched-pairs images simultaneously, deciding which image in the pair had the highest image quality or if it was impossible to decide. The relationship between image quality and movement/movement characteristics was evaluated. RESULTS: When the 66 CBCT images were evaluated individually, no relationship between image quality and movement was found. However, based on the matched-pairs assessment, accumulated number (≤2 vs ≥3, p = 0.039), duration (≤5 s vs ≥6 s, p = 0.024) and complexity (uniplanar vs multiplanar, p = 0.046) of movements had an impact on image quality; the more severe the movement, the more often the image quality was assessed lower in the MG. CONCLUSIONS: Axial CBCT images of young patients who moved during examination did not always present lower quality than images originating from non-moving patients. Image quality was, however, significantly lower in the moving patients when movement occurred several times, had a long duration or was multiplanar.