PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Wang, E.Y. AU - Mulholland, T.P. AU - Pramanik, B.K. AU - Nusbaum, A.O. AU - Babb, J. AU - Pavone, A.G. AU - Fleisher, K.E. TI - 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 AID - 10.3174/ajnr.A0487 DP - 2007 Jun 01 TA - American Journal of Neuroradiology PG - 1126--1132 VI - 28 IP - 6 4099 - http://www.ajnr.org/content/28/6/1126.short 4100 - http://www.ajnr.org/content/28/6/1126.full SO - Am. J. Neuroradiol.2007 Jun 01; 28 AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Our aim was to assess dynamic half-Fourier acquired single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE) MR imaging of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) using parallel imaging, in comparison with static proton density (Pd) imaging.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-four TMJs from 17 subjects (7 volunteers, 10 patients) were imaged in a multichannel head coil on a 1.5T magnet by using a 35-second dynamic sagittal HASTE acquisition (TR/TE, 1180/65 msec; matrix, 128 × 128; section thickness, 7 mm; 30 images) and sagittal oblique Pd in closed- and open-mouthed positions (TR/TE, 1800/12 msec; matrix, 256 × 256; section thickness, 2 mm; 15 sections). Images were reviewed by 3 readers and rated for confidence of disk position, presence of motion artifact, range of motion, and presence of disk displacement on a 5-point scale. Consensus review of cases was also performed to assess disk dislocation and limited range of motion.RESULTS: More static examinations were rated as having motion artifact (19.6% versus 6.9%, P = .016), limited range of motion (30.4% versus 17.7%, P = .016), and disk dislocations (31.4% versus 22.6%, P = .071). Confidence ratings were higher on dynamic examinations (4.11 versus 3.74, P = .018). Chi-squared tests demonstrated no significant difference in consensus reviews of the 2 examination types.CONCLUSION: Dynamic HASTE TMJ MR imaging is a time-efficient adjunct to standard MR imaging protocols, producing fewer motion artifacts, additional range of motion information, and a dynamic assessment of disk position, when compared with static imaging. Further study is needed to evaluate the role of this sequence in diagnosing disk displacement.