AJR Not a Member? Click to Join ARRS!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schellhas, K.
Right arrow Articles by Omlie, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schellhas, K.
Right arrow Articles by Omlie, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 151, Issue 4, 731-735
Copyright © 1988 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Permanent Proplast temporomandibular joint implants: MR imaging of destructive complications

KP Schellhas, CH Wilkes, M el Deeb, LB Lagrotteria, and MR Omlie

Center for Diagnostic Imaging, St. Louis Park, MN 55416.

We studied the radiologic and pathologic changes in 30 patients (34 joints) in which there were locally destructive bone and soft-tissue complications associated with previously inserted permanent temporomandibular joint (TMJ) Proplast-Teflon implants. The cases were selected as representative examples of patients with failed Proplast interpositional arthroplasty, in whom images of the TMJ were obtained with conventional radiography, tomography, and MR, and in whom both surgical and histologic findings were available. Clinical indications for imaging included joint pain, restricted joint motion, crepitus, preauricular swelling, regional lymphadenopathy, malocclusion either acquired or changed since implant surgery, and facial deformity. Surgery was then performed for the purposes of implant retrieval and joint debridement because of destructive soft-tissue and osseous changes observed from the imaging analysis in conjunction with significant clinical signs and symptoms. The pathologic changes, observed 4-54 months after implant surgery, included a destructive foreign-body-type granuloma and avascular necrosis of the mandibular condyle and condylar neck. Our findings suggest that MR is useful in the detection and evaluation of destructive complications that may accompany failed Proplast-Teflon implants in the TMJ. MR is superior to conventional radiography and tomography in detecting soft-tissue lesions and avascular necrosis of bone. Tomography more accurately delineates soft-tissue calcifications and cortical margins of osseous structures.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
O. J. Sommer, F. Aigner, A. Rudisch, H. Gruber, H. Fritsch, W. Millesi, and M. Stiskal
Cross-sectional and Functional Imaging of the Temporomandibular Joint: Radiology, Pathology, and Basic Biomechanics of the Jaw
RadioGraphics, November 1, 2003; 23(6): e14 - e14.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck SurgHome page
A. Patel and R. Maisel
Condylar Prostheses in Head and Neck Cancer Reconstruction
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, July 1, 2001; 127(7): 842 - 846.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.