Three-Dimensional Assessment of Temporomandibular Joint Using MRI-CBCT Image Registration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To introduce a new approach to reconstruct a 3D model of the TMJ using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) registered images, and to evaluate the intra-examiner reproducibility values of reconstructing the 3D models of the TMJ. METHODS: MRI and CBCT images of five patients (10 TMJs) were obtained. Multiple MRIs and CBCT images were registered using a mutual information based algorithm. The articular disc, condylar head and glenoid fossa were segmented at two different occasions, at least one-week apart, by one investigator, and 3D models were reconstructed. Differences between the segmentation at two occasions were automatically measured using the surface contours (Average Perpendicular Distance) and the volume overlap (Dice Similarity Index) of the 3D models. Descriptive analysis of the changes at 2 occasions, including means and standard deviation (SD) were reported to describe the intra-examiner reproducibility. RESULTS: The automatic segmentation of the condyle revealed maximum distance change of 1.9±0.93 mm, similarity index of 98% and root mean squared distance of 0.1±0.08 mm, and the glenoid fossa revealed maximum distance change of 2±0.52 mm, similarity index of 96% and root mean squared distance of 0.2±0.04 mm. The manual segmentation of the articular disc revealed maximum distance change of 3.6±0.32 mm, similarity index of 80% and root mean squared distance of 0.3±0.1 mm. CONCLUSION: The MRI-CBCT registration provides a reliable tool to reconstruct 3D models of the TMJ's soft and hard tissues, allows quantification of the articular disc morphology and position changes with associated differences of the condylar head and glenoid fossa, and facilitates measuring tissue changes over time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".