Abstract
Objectives
The study aimed to determine the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) findings, to investigate the prevalence contribution of this sequence on cases in which cranial magnetic resonance examination was performed and three-dimensional (3D) T2-SPACE (T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip-angle evolutions) sequence was used by retrospectively scanning the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) archive of our hospital, and to reveal the advantages of the 3D-T2 SPACE sequence in patients with TMJ disorders.
Patients and methods
The cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted with 499 patients (289 females, 210 males; mean age: 50.1±17.7 years; range, 8 to 92 years) who underwent brain MRI and had 3D-T2 SPACE between March 1, 2021 and March 1, 2022. Two radiologists analyzed the TMJs of the subjects included in the study in 3D-T2 SPACE sequences.
Results
At least one incidental finding was detected in the TMJ in 37.1% (n=185) of the patients included in our study. In our study, the most common (13.6%) MRI findings were osteoarthritic changes and synovial cysts. Joint effusion (13.2%) and disc displacement (9%) were less frequent. When the relationship between the age of the patients and the presence of incidental findings, degeneration, effusion, disc displacement, and cyst was examined, the age of the patients with incidental findings (p=0.001) and osteoarthritic changes (p<0.001) was statistically significantly higher.
Conclusion
Incidental findings, particularly osteoarthritic changes and synovial cysts, can be seen quite commonly in the TMJ in brain MRI using 3D T2-SPACE sequences in the general population. The 3D T2-SPACE sequence provides valuable information in the recognition of TMJ disorders.
Keywords: 3D T2-SPACE, incidental findings, temporomandibular joint.
Introduction
The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is located between the mandible and temporal bone, just in front of the external auditory canal. The TMJ, which has a crucial role in chewing and speaking, is one of the most complex joints in our body, consisting of the articular disc, ligaments, and synovial membrane and its fluid.[1] Due to the complex anatomy and localization of the joint, TMJ disorders (TMDs) are common, and various imaging techniques are needed to help with diagnosis and treatment planning.[2] Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard for diagnosing TMDs.[2,3] It provides a detailed evaluation of the soft tissue and bone marrow.[2] Adequate information about the bilaminar zone, fibrocartilaginous joint surfaces, and the fibrocartilaginous disc cannot be obtained with different imaging methods.[2] Magnetic resonance imaging is a technique that is constantly renewed and changing with the developing technology. The developing MRI technologies will help in early diagnosis and treatment planning, therapeutic efficacy evaluation, and even image-guided interventional procedures.[4] Three-dimensional (3D) T2-SPACE (T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flipangle evolutions) is an emerging sequence that is slowly entering routine use. In recent years, this sequence has been studied in the literature.[5,6] This sequence has many advantages, such as being less affected by artifacts, obtaining slices in submillimetric voxel sizes, obtaining 3D and high-resolution images with reformat images, and having low SAR (specific absorption rate) values.[5,6] Three-dimensional volumetric MRI sequences with excellent spatial and contrast resolution have been used by physicians in clinical practice to image joints with complex anatomy, such as the knee, ankle, shoulder, and wrist.[7] These recent advances in image quality have led to an increase in unexpected findings, often referred to as incidental findings (IFs), that are not directly relevant to the study.[8] There are studies in the literature examining the prevalence of IFs in adult populations with brain MRI.[9] While the percentage of clinically significant findings is low (0.3-3.4%), IFs are surprisingly common (5-20%).[10] However, evaluation with TMJ was not performed in these studies. Rather, these are studies that evaluate pathologies such as space-occupying lesions, structural vascular anomalies, and cysts.[9] There is only one study in the literature evaluating the prevalence and clinical relevance of incidental TMJ findings using brain MRI scans.[11] However, only standard brain MRI sequences were used in this study.
The aim of this study was to determine the TMJ findings, to investigate prevalence estimates of this sequence on cases in which cranial MR examination was performed and 3D T2-SPACE sequence was used by retrospectively scanning the MRI archive of our hospital, and to reveal the advantages of the 3D T2-SPACE sequence in patients with TMDs.
Patients and Methods
Patients who underwent brain MRI and had 3D T2-SPACE sequences in the Department of Radiology, Duzce University Hospital between March 1, 2021 and March 1, 2022, were included in this cross-sectional retrospective study. In addition, the clinical and sociodemographic information of the cases included in the study and the reasons for the examination request were obtained from the automation system of our hospital. Patients with a known active rheumatic disease, fracture involving the facial region, and any history of surgery related to the TMJ were excluded from the study. For this purpose, 499 patients (289 females, 210 males; mean age: 50.0±17.7 years; range, 8 to 92 years) were included in our study.
MRI technique
The patients included in the study were cases with cranial symptoms and were sent for routine brain MRIs. All patients' MRIs had axial turbo spin echo (TSE) T1, axial TSE T2, coronal TSE T2, axial T2 FLAIR (fluid-attenuated inversion recovery), and DWI (diffusion-weighted imaging) sequences. Since we had included the sagittal 3D T2-SPACE sequence in brain MRI examinations since January 2020, all patients also had the sagittal 3D T2-SPACE sequence in this study. Sequence parameters for 3D T2-SPACE were TR/TE=3200/400 msec, flip angle=variable, slice thickness=1 mm, and FOV=256×256 mm.
Image evaluation
Two radiologists with at least 15 and five years of experience in the field, blind to the patients’ clinical information and identity, analyzed the TMJs of the subjects included in the study in 3D T2-SPACE sequences. Diagnoses were based purely on radiographic appearance using conventional MRI interpretation procedures. The first radiologist analyzed the whole brain MRI cases within four weeks. Then the second radiologist made a detailed analysis of 185 cases. As a result, the data of the second radiologist were collected for use in the study. The collected data were analyzed under the following headings: (i) joint effusion, (ii) osteoarthritic changes, (iii) synovial cysts, and (iv) disc displacement with or without degeneration.
Statistical analysis
Power analysis was made using the G*Power version 3.1.9.4 software (Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany) and in accordance with a similar study.[11] The sample size was calculated as 499 participants, with a type 1 error of 0.05 and 90% power.
Statistical analysis was performed with the IBM SPSS version 20.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). While making the descriptive statistics of the study, numerical variables were given as mean ± standard deviation (SD), and categorical variables were given as numbers and percentages. The distribution of numerical variables was analyzed with histogram graphics. Student’s t-test and one-way analysis of variance were used while evaluating numerical variables. The Pearson chi-square test was used in the analysis of categorical variables. Pearson correlation analysis was used for correlation. The statistical significance level was accepted as p<0.05.
Results
At least one IF was detected in the TMJ in 37.1% (n=185) of the patients included in our study. An IF was not found in 62.9% of them. Incidental findings were detected at a rate of 45.13% in people aged 65 and over and 34.72% in people under 65 years of age. When the status of having IF was analyzed according to the sex of patients, it was statistically significantly higher in females (p<0.001).
In our study, the most common (13.6%) MRI findings were osteoarthritic changes and synovial cysts (Figure 1). Joint effusion (13.2%) and disc displacement (9%) were less frequent (Figure 2). Osteoarthritic changes were seen in 30.97% of people aged 65 and over and 8.55% of people under 65 years of age. Joint effusion was detected in 13.27% of people aged 65 and over and 13.21% of people under 65 years of age. Synovial cysts were seen in 12.39% of people aged 65 and over and 13.99% of people under 65 years of age. Disc displacement was found in 6.19% of people aged 65 and over and 9.84% of people under 65 years of age.
Figure 1. Coronal (a), axial (b), and sagittal (c) reformat T2-weighted SPACE MRI scans reveal a synovial cyst (red arrows) originating from the left TMJ. T2-SPACE: T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip-angle evolutions; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; TMJ: Temporomandibular joint; C: Mandibular condyle.
Figure 2. (a) Coronal and (b and c) consecutive sagittal T2-weighted SPACE MRIs show effusion (red arrow heads) of the right TMJ. The last frame sagittal MRI image (c) also demonstrates anterior disc displacement (blue arrow heads). T2-SPACE: T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip-angle evolutions; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; TMJ: Temporomandibular joint; C: Mandibular condyle.
In our study, we found bilateral synovial cysts in three cases. Of these patients, two were female and one was male, and their ages were 16, 41, and 51, respectively. When IFs were examined according to their anatomical localization, osteoarthritic changes were mostly observed bilaterally. Joint effusion, synovial cysts, and disc displacement tended to be more unilateral (Table 1).
Table 1. Anatomical distribution of MRI findings.
| Bilateral | Unilateral | |||||
| n | % | Right | Left | |||
| n | % | n | % | |||
| Joint effusion | 17 | 25.76 | 24 | 36.36 | 25 | 37.88 |
| Osteoarthritic changes | 43 | 63.24 | 12 | 17.65 | 13 | 19.12 |
| Synovial cysts | 3 | 4.41 | 32 | 47.06 | 33 | 48.53 |
| Disc displacement | 14 | 31.11 | 17 | 37.78 | 14 | 31.11 |
The mean value of the diameters of the cysts was 0.65±1.46 mm on the right and 0.75±1.75 mm on the left. The relationship between cyst diameter and the age of the patients was evaluated with Pearson correlation analysis, and no significant correlation was found (r=–0.233, p=0.056).
When the relationship between the age of the patients and the presence of IFs, degeneration, effusion, disc displacement, and cysts was examined, the age of the patients with IFs (p=0.001) and osteoarthritic changes (p<0.001) was statistically significantly higher. There was no statistically significant difference between age and joint effusion, synovial cysts, and disc displacement (p=0.632, p=0.537, and p=0.703, respectively; Table 2).
Table 2. Relationship between age and incidental findings, degeneration, effusion, disc displacement, and presence of a cyst.
| n | Age (year) | p* | |
| Mean±SD | |||
| Incidental findings | |||
| Present | 185 | 53.37±17.02 | 0.001 |
| Absent | 314 | 48.13±17.84 | |
| Osteoarthritic changes | |||
| Present | 68 | 63.62±14.45 | <0.001 |
| Absent | 431 | 47.94±17.23 | |
| Joint effusion | |||
| Present | 66 | 51.05±16.42 | 0.632 |
| Absent | 433 | 49.92±17.91 | |
| Synovial cysts | |||
| Present | 68 | 48.84±16.31 | 0.537 |
| Absent | 431 | 50.27±17.92 | |
| Disc displacement | |||
| Present | 45 | 49.11±15.26 | 0.703 |
| Absent | 454 | 50.17±17.94 | |
| SD: Standard deviation; *Student t-test. | |||
The relationship between the sex of the patients and the osteoarthritic changes, joint effusion, disc displacement, and the presence of cysts in the TMJ were examined. IFs (p<0.001), osteoarthritic changes (p=0.023), joint effusion (p<0.001), and disc displacement (p=0.012) was statistically significantly higher in females than in males. There was no statistically significant relationship between the sex of the patients and synovial cysts (p=0.138, Table 3).
Table 3. The relationship between IFs, osteoarthritic changes, joint effusion, synovial cysts, and disc displacement in the TMJ by sex and age groups.
| Age (year) | Sex | |||||||||||
| Findings | n | % | <65 | >65 | p* | Males | Females | p* | ||||
| n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | |||||
| IFs | 185 | 37.1 | 134 | 34.72 | 51 | 45.13 | 0.044 | 57 | 11.4 | 128 | 25.6 | <0.001 |
| Osteoarthritic changes | 68 | 13.6 | 33 | 8.55 | 35 | 30.97 | <0.001 | 20 | 4 | 48 | 9.6 | 0.023 |
| Joint effusion | 66 | 13.2 | 51 | 13.21 | 15 | 13.27 | 0.986 | 14 | 2.8 | 52 | 10.4 | <0.001 |
| Synovial cysts | 68 | 13.6 | 54 | 13.99 | 14 | 12.39 | 0.663 | 23 | 4.6 | 45 | 9 | 0.138 |
| Disc displacement | 45 | 9.0 | 38 | 9.84 | 7 | 6.19 | 0.234 | 11 | 2.2 | 34 | 6.8 | 0.012 |
| IFs: Incidental findings; * Chi-square test. | ||||||||||||
When the patients were divided into two groups according to their sex and age, and their relationship with IFs, osteoarthritic changes, joint effusion, synovial cysts, and disc displacement was examined, there was a statistically significant relationship only with osteoarthritic changes (p<0.001, Table 3).
When the relationship between age and anatomical localization of degeneration, effusion, disc displacement, and cyst presence was evaluated, there was no statistically significant difference (p=0.209, p=0.147, p=0.234, and p=0.372, respectively; Table 4).
Table 4. Relationship between age and anatomical localization of degeneration, effusion, disc displacement, and cysts.
| Age | p* | |||
| Bilateral | Right | Left | ||
| Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | ||
| Joint effusion | 56.65±18.44 | 46.50±19.06 | 51.60±10.61 | 0.147 |
| Osteoarthritic changes | 65.91±14.14 | 61.08±15.22 | 58.38±14.16 | 0.209 |
| Synovial cysts | 36.00±18.03 | 49.94±17.39 | 48.94±15.07 | 0.372 |
| Disc displacement | 48.79±15.17 | 45.00±17.22 | 54.43±11.87 | 0.234 |
| SD: Standard deviation; * One-Way Anova test | ||||
There was an additional cranial pathology in 82.2% of the patients with IFs, and no additional cranial pathology was found in 17.8%. Headache was the most common reason for requesting tests in patients with IFs, with a rate of 44.3%. Subsequently, examination requests were made for the following reasons: intracranial mass or metastasis (12.4%), vertigo 9.7%, cerebrovascular disease (8.1%), neck and arm pain (5.4%), loss of balance and weakness 4.3%, demyelinating disease (3.2%), numbness in the face and tongue (2.7%), forgetfulness (2.7%), ringing in the ear (1.6%), loss of balance and weakness (1.6%), facial paralysis (1.6%), operated cranial lesion (1.1%), and confusion (1.1%).
Discussion
Temporomandibular joint disorders are an important public health problem affecting approximately 5-12% of the general population and negatively affecting the quality of life of patients.[12] Studies show that the prevalence of TMDs in the population is approximately 10-15% for adults and 4-7% for adolescents.[13-15] According to a meta-analysis, the overall prevalence of TMDs was reported to be approximately 31% for adults and the elderly and approximately 11% for children and adolescents.[12] In this study, at least one IF was detected in any TMJ at a rate of 45.13% in patients aged 65 and over and 34.72% in patients under 65 years of age. The reason for our higher rate compared to the literature may be related to the examination method we used.
With the developments in imaging modalities, IFs can be observed widely by radiologists. Incidental findings pose a diagnostic dilemma for radiologists. They usually partially enter the view area, or when fully visualized, special identifying sequences are often not available.[16] In a retrospective study examining IFs in the maxillofacial region using 3D cone-beam computed tomography, at least one finding was found in 15.4% of TMJs.[17] In this study, we detected IFs in approximately one of three patients.
In the study by Simonovich et al.,[11] which examined the prevalence of incidental TMJ findings using brain MRI scans in the literature, the most common finding was disc displacement, followed by flattening of the condyle. In our study, the most common MRI findings were osteoarthritic changes and synovial cysts. Joint effusion and disc displacement were less frequently observed. The higher incidence of joint effusion and synovial cysts in our study can be explained by the thin section of the 3D T2-SPACE sequence we used and the fact that it is a fluid-sensitive sequence. According to the literature, the prevalence of disc displacement in at least one TMJ on MRI performed in asymptomatic participants has been reported to be approximately 21-33%.[18-20] The number of studies investigating the joint effusion rate in asymptomatic participants is limited; however, in a study, they found moderate TMJ fluid in about one out of five.[20] In our study, the joint effusion rate was 13.2% and the disc displacement was 9% in any TMJ. The prevalence of osteoarthritis in TMJ has been reported in 8-16% of the general population, which is similar to generalized osteoarthritis.[21] Little is known about the prevalence of TMJ osteoarthritis due to the complex anatomy of the TMJ and its proximity to other functional structures.[22] In this study, we found 13.6% of osteoarthritic changes, consistent with the prevalence of generalized osteoarthritis.
Degenerative joint disease can occur at any age, but it is more common in older age groups due to the effect of cumulative exposure to various risk factors and biological changes that occur with aging.[17,22] In our study, osteoarthritic changes were significantly more common in individuals aged 65 and over, consistent with the literature.
Common symptoms of TMDs include jaw pain, impaired jaw joint movement, headache, neck pain, and stiffness.[23,24] Temporomandibular joint disorders can cause referred pain, particularly undifferentiated headaches.[24] Some studies have shown that up to 55% of patients with chronic headaches referred to a neurologist have significant signs and symptoms of TMDs.[25] In our study, the most common reason for requesting examination in patients with IFs was headaches, with a rate of 44.3%. We did not retrospectively question the complaints of our patients, but Simonovich et al.[11] found that about half of their patients had headache complaints when they retrospectively questioned the complaints of the patients. Therefore, TMDs should also come to mind in complex cases.
While synovial cysts are mostly seen in joints, such as knees, hands, and ankles, they rarely affect the TMJ. Synovial cysts are different from ganglion cysts because they contain synovial fluid and are associated with the joint.[26] In a study by Partridge et al.,[26] 14 patients treated for TMJ cysts were evaluated by immunohistochemical analysis. They found 69% of them had synovial cysts and 31% had ganglion cysts. They reported that synovial cysts are more common than ganglion cysts in the TMJ and that the frequency of synovial cysts in TMJ may be higher than the literature suggests. Our study also supports the hypothesis of Partridge et al.[26] In another study, 29 unilateral and two bilateral synovial cysts were reported in the TMJ joint.[27] In our study, we found unilateral synovial cysts in 32 (17.3%) cases on the right and 33 (17.8%) cases on the left, and bilateral synovial cysts were present in three (1.6%) cases.
Based on data from the literature, we can conclude that TMDs are more common in females than males.[15,19,28-30] In our study, IFs, osteoarthritic changes, joint effusion, and disc displacement were significantly more common in females than males.
Only a small percentage of individuals affected by TMJ are known to seek or need treatment.[12] Therefore, physicians should be aware that some TMJ findings that may affect the general population may be seen at relatively high rates.
There are some limitations to this study. First, it was a single-center study. Therefore, its validity should be confirmed by multicenter studies. Another limitation of our study is that it was not questioned whether the findings in TMJ caused any symptoms in the patients. In addition, due to the retrospective nature of the study, the fact that the group of patients who requested brain MRI for any purpose constituted the population of our study may affect the prevalence of IF.
In conclusion, IFs, particularly osteoarthritic changes and synovial cysts, can be seen quite commonly in the TMJ in brain MRI using 3D T2-SPACE sequence in the general population. Incidental findings were more common in females and advanced age. The 3D T2-SPACE sequence provides valuable information in the recognition of TMDs. We believe that the use of 3D volumetric MRI in TMDs will gradually increase with new studies.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Author Contributions: Concept or design: R.S., H.O.; Search of literature and interpretation of data: R.S; Acquisition of data: A.G.; Analysis or interpretation of data: A.K.; Critical revision for important intellectual content: S.A.
Financial Disclosure: The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
References
- 1.Odabaş B, Arslan SG. Temporomandibular eklem anatomisi be rahatsızlıkları. Dicle Tıp Dergisi. 2008;35:77–85. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Tomas X, Pomes J, Berenguer J, Quinto L, Nicolau C, Mercader JM, et al. MR imaging of temporomandibular joint dysfunction: A pictorial review. Radiographics. 2006;26:765–781. doi: 10.1148/rg.263055091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Bernhardt O, Biffar R, Kocher T, Meyer G. Prevalence and clinical signs of degenerative temporomandibular joint changes validated by magnetic resonance imaging in a non-patient group. Ann Anat. 2007;189:342–346. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2007.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Xiong X, Ye Z, Tang H, Wei Y, Nie L, Wei X, et al. MRI of temporomandibular joint disorders: Recent advances and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021;54:1039–1052. doi: 10.1002/jmri.27338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Özcan ANŞ, Aslan K. Diagnostic accuracy of sagittal TSE-T2W, variable flip angle 3D TSET2W and highresolution 3D heavily T2W sequences for the stenosis of two localizations: The cerebral aqueduct and the superior medullary velum. Curr Med Imaging. 2021;17:1432–1438. doi: 10.2174/1573405617666210806123720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ulbrich EJ, Zubler V, Sutter R, Espinosa N, Pfirrmann CW, Zanetti M. Ligaments of the Lisfranc joint in MRI: 3D-SPACE (sampling perfection with application optimized contrasts using different flip-angle evolution) sequence compared to three orthogonal proton-density fat-saturated (PD fs) sequences. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42:399–409. doi: 10.1007/s00256-012-1491-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Kijowski R, Gold GE. Routine 3D magnetic resonance imaging of joints. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33:758–771. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Panelli Santos KC, Fujita M, Oliveira JX, Yanagi Y, Asaumi J. Should incidental findings in diagnostic imaging be reported. Minerva Stomatol. 2017;66:75–80. doi: 10.23736/S0026-4970.17.03971-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Morris Z, Whiteley WN, Longstreth WT Jr, Weber F, Lee YC, Tsushima Y, et al. Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: Systematic review and meta-analysis. b3016BMJ. 2009;339 doi: 10.1136/bmj.b3016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Borra RJ, Sorensen AG. Incidental findings in brain MRI research: What do we owe our subjects. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011;8:848–852. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.08.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Simonovich A, Kolontaevsky S, Kalichman L. Incidental findings of temporomandibular joint disorders on standard brain MRIs. Ann Dent Oral Health. 2020;3:1016–1016. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Valesan LF, Da-Cas CD, Réus JC, Denardin ACS, Garanhani RR, Bonotto D, et al. Prevalence of temporomandibular joint disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25:441–453. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03710-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Nilsson IM, List T, Drangsholt M. Prevalence of temporomandibular pain and subsequent dental treatment in Swedish adolescents. J Orofac Pain. 2005;19:144–150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Macfarlane TV, Glenny AM, Worthington HV. Systematic review of population-based epidemiological studies of orofacial pain. J Dent. 2001;29:451–467. doi: 10.1016/s0300-5712(01)00041-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.List T, Jensen RH. Temporomandibular disorders: Old ideas and new concepts. Cephalalgia. 2017;37:692–704. doi: 10.1177/0333102416686302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Makdissi J, Pawar RR, Radon M, Holmes SB. Incidental findings on MRI of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20130175–20130175. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20130175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Price JB, Thaw KL, Tyndall DA, Ludlow JB, Padilla RJ. Incidental findings from cone beam computed tomography of the maxillofacial region: A descriptive retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23:1261–1268. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02299.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Tasaki MM, Westesson PL, Isberg AM, Ren YF, Tallents RH. Classification and prevalence of temporomandibular joint disk displacement in patients and symptom-free volunteers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996;109:249–262. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(96)70148-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Katzberg RW, Westesson PL, Tallents RH, Drake CM. Anatomic disorders of the temporomandibular joint disc in asymptomatic subjects. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996;54:147–155. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(96)90435-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Larheim TA, Katzberg RW, Westesson PL, Tallents RH, Moss ME. MR evidence of temporomandibular joint fluid and condyle marrow alterations: Occurrence in asymptomatic volunteers and symptomatic patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2001;30:113–117. doi: 10.1054/ijom.2000.0018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bansal M. Prevalence and diagnostic features of osteoarthrosis of the temporomandibular joint: A review. Int J Res Orthop. 2016;2:1–1. doi: 10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20160708. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Alzahrani A, Yadav S, Gandhi V, Lurie AG, Tadinada A. Incidental findings of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis and its variability based on age and sex. Imaging Sci Dent. 2020;50:245–253. doi: 10.5624/isd.2020.50.3.245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Karan A. Temporomandibular eklem rahatsızlıklarında semptom ve bulgular ile genel değerlendirme. Türk Fiz Tıp Rehab Derg. 2010;56:11–14. doi: 10.4274/tftr.56.11. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Buescher JJ. Temporomandibular joint disorders. Am Fam Physician. 2007;76:1477–1482. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Wright EF, Clark EG, Paunovich ED, Hart RG. Headache improvement through TMD stabilization appliance and self-management therapies. Cranio. 2006;24:104–111. doi: 10.1179/crn.2006.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Partridge JC, Cipriani N, Faquin WC, Chuang SK, Keith DA, Lahey ET. Periarticular cysts of the temporomandibular joint are more frequently synovial than ganglion. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74:1396–1402. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.01.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Buckley C, Beecher S, Sleeman D, O'Shaughnessy M. Bilateral synovial cysts of the temporomandibular joint. e230081BMJ Case Rep. 2019;12 doi: 10.1136/bcr-2019-230081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Pihut M, Pac A, Gala A. Frequency of occurrence of the pain form of the temporomandibular disorders and gender distribution. Folia Med Cracov. 2021;61:25–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Liu F, Steinkeler A. Epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of temporomandibular disorders. Dent Clin North Am. 2013;57:465–479. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2013.04.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Bueno CH, Pereira DD, Pattussi MP, Grossi PK, Grossi ML. Gender differences in temporomandibular disorders in adult populational studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Rehabil. 2018;45:720–729. doi: 10.1111/joor.12661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


