The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Three-dimensional evaluation of the mandibular condyle in adults with various skeletal patterns

  • Ahmed Maher Mohsen (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University) ;
  • Junjie Ye (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University) ;
  • Akram Al-Nasri (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University) ;
  • Catherine Chu (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University) ;
  • Wei-Bing Zhang (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University) ;
  • Lin-Wang (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, Nanjing Medical University)
  • Received : 2022.04.06
  • Accepted : 2022.10.25
  • Published : 2023.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Morphometric and morphological evaluation of the mandibular condyle in adults and to identify its correlation with skeletal malocclusion patterns. Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography scans of 135 adult patients were used in this study and classified into groups according to four criteria: (1) sex (male and female); (2) sagittal skeletal discrepancy (Class I, Class II, and Class III); (3) vertical skeletal discrepancy (hyperdivergent, normodivergent, and hypodivergent); and age (group 1 ≤ 20 years, 21 ≤ group 2 < 30, and group 3 ≥ 30 years). The morphometrical variables were mandibular condyle height and width, and the morphological variable was the mandibular condyle shape in coronal and sagittal sections. Three-dimensional standard tessellation language files were created using itk-snap (open-source software), and measurements were performed using Meshmixer (open-source software). Results: The mandibular condyle height was significantly greater (p < 0.05) in patients with class III malocclusion than in those with class I or II malocclusion; the mandibular condyle width was not significantly different among different sexes, age groups, and sagittal and vertical malocclusions. There were no statistical associations between various mandibular condyle shapes and the sexes, age groups, and skeletal malocclusions. Conclusions: The condylar height was greatest in patients with class III malocclusion. The condylar height and width were greater among males than in females. The mandibular condyle shapes observed in sagittal and coronal sections did not affect the skeletal malocclusion patterns.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the National Natural Foundation of China (grant number 81870797).

References

  1. Jablonski S. Illustrated dictionary of dentistry. Philadelphia: W.B Saunders Co.; 1982.
  2. Mohl N, Zarb G, Carlsson G, Rugh J. Textbook of occlusion. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co.; 1988. p. 139-40.
  3. Kandasamy S, Greene CS, Rinchuse DJ, Stockstill JW. TMD and orthodontics: a clinical guide for the orthodontist. Cham: Springer; 2015.
  4. Snell RS. Clinical anatomy for medical students. Boston: Little Brown & Co.; 1995.
  5. Williams PL BL, Berry MM, Collins P, Dyson M, Dussek JE, et al. Skeletal system-individual cranial bones. In: Williams PL BL, Berry MM, Collins P, Dyson M, Dussek JE, et al., eds. Gray's anatomy: The anatomical basis of medicine and surgery. 38th ed. Great Britain: Churchill Livingstone; 1995. p. 577.
  6. Ardakani FE, Niafar N. Evaluation of changes in the mandibular angular cortex using panoramic images. J Contemp Dent Pract 2004;5:1-15. https://doi.org/10.5005/jcdp-5-3-1
  7. Solberg WK, Bibb CA, Nordstrom BB, Hansson TL. Malocclusion associated with temporomandibular joint changes in young adults at autopsy. Am J Orthod 1986;89:326-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(86)90055-2
  8. Gray H, Standring S. Gray's anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
  9. Alomar X, Medrano J, Cabratosa J, Clavero JA, Lorente M, Serra I, et al. Anatomy of the temporomandibular joint. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2007;28:170-83. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2007.02.002
  10. Hegde S, Praveen BN, Shetty SR. Morphological and radiological variations of mandibular condyles in health and diseases: a systematic review. Dentistry 2013;3:154.
  11. Krisjane Z, Urtane I, Krumina G, Bieza A, Zepa K, Rogovska I. Condylar and mandibular morphological criteria in the 2D and 3D MSCT imaging for patients with Class II division 1 subdivision malocclusion. Stomatologija 2007;9:67-71.
  12. Al-koshab M, Nambiar P, John J. Assessment of condyle and glenoid fossa morphology using CBCT in South-East Asians. PLoS One 2015;10:e0121682.
  13. Chae JM, Park JH, Tai K, Mizutani K, Uzuka S, Miyashita W, et al. Evaluation of condyle-fossa relationships in adolescents with various skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2020;90:224-32. https://doi.org/10.2319/052919-369.1
  14. Song J, Cheng M, Qian Y, Chu F. Cone-beam CT evaluation of temporomandibular joint in permanent dentition according to Angle's classification. Oral Radiol 2020;36:261-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-019-00403-3
  15. Zhang Y, Xu X, Liu Z. Comparison of morphologic parameters of temporomandibular joint for asymptomatic subjects using the two-dimensional and three-dimensional measuring methods. J Healthc Eng 2017;2017:5680708.
  16. Krisjane Z, Urtane I, Krumina G, Zepa K. Three-dimensional evaluation of TMJ parameters in Class II and Class III patients. Stomatologija 2009;11:32-6.
  17. Noh KJ, Baik HS, Han SS, Jang W, Choi YJ. Differences in mandibular condyle and glenoid fossa morphology in relation to vertical and sagittal skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Korean J Orthod 2021;51:126-34. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2021.51.2.126
  18. Tassoker M, Kabakci ADA, Akin D, Sener S. Evaluation of mandibular notch, coronoid process, and mandibular condyle configurations with cone beam computed tomography. Biomed Res 2017;28:8327-35.
  19. Isaac B, Holla SJ. Variations in the shape of the coronoid process in the adult human mandible. J Anat Soc India 2001;50:137-9.
  20. Ishwarkumar S, Pillay P, De-Gama B, Satyapal K. Osteometric and radiological study of the mandibular notch. Int J Morphol 2019;37:491-7. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022019000200491
  21. Oliveira-Santos C, Bernardo RT, Capelozza A. Mandibular condyle morphology on panoramic radiographs of asymptomatic temporomandibular joints. Int J Dent 2009;8.
  22. Sahithi D, Reddy S, Teja DD, Koneru J, Praveen KNS, Sruthi R. Reveal the concealed - morphological variations of the coronoid process, condyle and sigmoid notch in personal identification. Egypt J Forensic Sci 2016;6:108-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejfs.2015.11.003
  23. Nagaraj T, Nigam H, Santosh H, Gogula S, Sumana C, Sahu P. Morphological variations of the coronoid process, condyle and sigmoid notch as an adjunct in personal identification. J Med Radiol Pathol Surg 2017;4:1-5. https://doi.org/10.15713/ins.jmrps.86
  24. Hwang HS, Hwang CH, Lee KH, Kang BC. Maxillofacial 3-dimensional image analysis for the diagnosis of facial asymmetry. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:779-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.021
  25. Lopez TT, Michel-Crosato E, Benedicto EN, Paiva LA, Silva DC, Biazevic MG. Accuracy of mandibular measurements of sexual dimorphism using stabilizer equipment. Braz Oral Res 2017;31:e1.
  26. Saccucci M, D'Attilio M, Rodolfino D, Festa F, Polimeni A, Tecco S. Condylar volume and condylar area in class I, class II and class III young adult subjects. Head Face Med 2012;8:34.
  27. Wolff J. The law of bone remodelling. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
  28. Charalampidou M, Kjellberg H, Georgiakaki I, Kiliaridis S. Masseter muscle thickness and mechanical advantage in relation to vertical craniofacial morphology in children. Acta Odontol Scand 2008;66:23-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016350701884604
  29. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Nixon WL. Occlusal forces in normal- and long-face adults. J Dent Res 1983;62:566-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345830620051201
  30. Gomes SGF. [Effect of facial vertical pattern on mastication and its parameters] [PhD dissertation]. Piracicaba: UNICAMP Universidade Estadual de Campinas; 2010. Portugues.
  31. Yale SH, Allison BD, Hauptfuehrer JD. An epidemiological assessment of mandibular condyle morphology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1966;21:169-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(66)90238-6
  32. Ribeiro EC, Sanches ML, Alonso LG, Smith RL. Shape and symmetry of human condyle and mandibular fossa. Int J Odontostomat 2015;9:65-72. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-381X2015000100010
  33. Chaudhary S, Srivastava D, Jaetli V, Tirth A. Evaluation of condylar morphology using panoramic radiography in normal adult population. Int J Sci Stud 2015;2:164-8.
  34. Shubhasini AR, Praveen BN, Shubha G, Keerthi G, Darshana SN. Study of three dimensional morphology of mandibular condyle using cone beam computed tomography. MJDS 2016;1:7-12.
  35. Vahanwala S, Pagare S, Gavand K, Roy C. Evaluation of condylar morphology using panoramic radiography. J Adv Clin Res Insights 2016;3:5-8. https://doi.org/10.15713/ins.jcri.94
  36. Anisuzzaman MM, Khan SR, Khan MTI, Abdullah MK, Afrin A. Evaluation of mandibular condylar morphology by orthopantomogram in Bangladeshi population. Update Dent Coll J 2019;9:29-31. https://doi.org/10.3329/updcj.v9i1.41203