Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Oral Radiology
Published in: Oral Radiology 1/2019

01-01-2019 | Original Article

Evaluation of condyle position in patients with Angle Class I, II, and III malocclusion using cone-beam computed tomography panoramic reconstructions

Published in: Oral Radiology | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

This study was performed to compare the positions of the right and left condyles between male and female patients with different Angle malocclusions using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) panoramic reconstructions.

Methods

The CBCT images of 60 patients (age of 18–37 years) were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided according to their Angle malocclusion classifications (Angle Classes I, II, and III). The condyle-to-eminence, condyle-to-fossa, and condyle-to-meatus distances were measured digitally using i-CAT software.

Results

The left and right condyle-to-fossa distances were the most variable parameters among the Angle classes. The right condyle-to-eminence and right condyle-to-fossa distances were significantly different among the classes. Male patients seemed to have a greater condyle-to-fossa distance on the right side in both the Class I and III groups. The mean distance from the condyle to eminence, condyle to fossa, and condyle to meatus on the right side was the greatest in the Angle Class II group.

Conclusions

In all three types of malocclusion (Angle Classes I, II, and III), the condyles on both the right and left sides were not exactly symmetric or centrally located within the glenoid fossa. This work emphasizes the differences in the condyle position between male and female patients. Furthermore, the symmetry and centricity of the condyles are not dependent on the patient’s sex or type of malocclusion.
Literature
1.
Merigue LF, Conti AC, Oltramari-Navarro PVP, Navarro RDL, Almedia MRD. Tomographic evaluation of the temporomandibular joint in malocclusion subjects: condylar morphology and position. Braz Oral Res. 2016;30(1).
2.
Arieta-Miranda JM, Silva-Valencia M, Flores-Mir C, Paredes-Sampen NA, Arriola-Guillen LE. Spatial analysis of condyle position according to sagittal skeletal relationship, assessed by cone beam computed tomography. Prog Orthod. 2013;14(1):36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Ganugapanta VR, Ponnada SR, Gaddam KPR, Perumalla K, Khan I, Mohammed NA. Computed tomographic evaluation of condylar symmetry and condyle–fossa relationship of the temporomandibular joint in subjects with normal occlusion and malocclusion: a comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(2):ZC29–Z33.PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Al-Saleh MA, Punithakumar K, Lagravere M, Boulanger P, Jaremko JL, Major PW. Three-dimensional assessment of temporomandibular joint using MRI-CBCT image registration. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0169555.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Kim HO, Lee W, Kook YA, Kim Y. Comparison of the condyle–fossa relationship between skeletal class III malocclusion patients with and without asymmetry: a retrospective three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography study. Korean J Orthod. 2013;43(5):209–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Paknahad M, Shahidi S. Association between mandibular condylar position and clinical dysfunction index. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(4):432–6.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Ricketts RM. Variations of the temporomandibular joint as revealed by cephalometric laminagraphy. Am J Orthod. 1950;36(12):877–98.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
Kahl B, Fischbach R, Gerlach KL. Temporomandibular joint morphology in children after treatment of condylar fractures with functional appliance therapy: a follow-up study us computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1995;24(1):37–45.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Farman AG, Scarfe WC. The basics of maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography. Semin Orthod. 2009;15(1):2–13.CrossRef
11.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc. 2006;72(1):75–80.PubMed
12.
Mongini F. Remodelling of the mandibular condyle in the adult and its relationship to the condition of the dental arches. Acta Anat (Basel). 1972;82(3):437–53.CrossRef
13.
Mongini F. Dental abrasion as a factor in remodeling of the mandibular condyle. Acta Anat (Basel). 1975;92(2):292–300.CrossRef
14.
Katsavrias EG, Halazonetis DJ. Condyle and fossa shape in Class II and Class III skeletal patterns: a morphometric tomographic study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(3):337–46.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Rodrigues AF, Fraga MR, Vitral RWF. Computed tomography evaluation of the temporomandibular joint in Class I malocclusion patients: condylar symmetry and condyle–fossa relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(2):192–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Rodrigues AF, Fraga MR, Vitral RWF. Computed tomography evaluation of the temporomandibular joint in Class II Division 1 and Class III malocclusion patients: condylar symmetry and condyle–fossa relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(2):199–206.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Pullinger AG, Solberg WK, Hollender L, Petersson A. Relationship of mandibular condylar position to dental occlusion factors in an asymptomatic population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;91(3):200–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Incesu L, Taşkaya-Yılmaz N, Öğütcen-Toller M, Uzun E. Relationship of condylar position to disc position and morphology. Eur J Radiol. 2004;51(3):269–73.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Matsumoto MA, Bolognese AM. Bone morphology of the temporomandibular joint and its relation to dental occlusion. Braz Dent J. 1995;6(2):115–22.PubMed
20.
Cohlmia JT, Ghosh J, Sinha PK, Nanda RS, Currier GF. Tomographic assessment of temporomandibular joints in patients with malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 1996;66(1):27–36.PubMed
21.
Fraga MR, Rodrigues AF, Ribeiro LC, da Silva Campos MJ, Vitral RWF. Anteroposterior condylar position: a comparative study between subjects with normal occlusion and patients with Class I, Class II Division 1, and Class III malocclusions. Med Sci Monit. 2013;19:903–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Vitral RWF, de Souza Telles C, Fraga MR, de Oliveira RSMF., Tanaka OM. Computed tomography evaluation of temporomandibular joint alterations in patients with class II division 1 subdivision malocclusions: condyle–fossa relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;126(1):48–52.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Vitral RWF, da Silva Campos MJ, Rodrigues AF, Fraga MR. Temporomandibular joint and normal occlusion: is there anything singular about it? A computed tomographic evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140(1):18–24.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Ricketts RM. Various conditions of the temporomandibular joint as revealed by cephalometric laminagraphy. Angle Orthod. 1952;22(2):98–115.
25.
Williamson EH, Evans DL, Barton WA, Williams BH. The effect of bite plane use on terminal hinge axis location. Angle Orthod. 1977;47(1):25–33.PubMed
26.
Pullinger AG, Seligman DA, John MT, Harkins S. Multifactorial modeling of temporomandibular anatomic and orthopedic relationships in normal versus undifferentiated disk displacement joints. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87(3):289–97.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Mah JK, Huang JC, Choo H. Practical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in orthodontics. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141:7S–13S.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Hodges RJ, Atchison KA, White SC. Impact of cone-beam computed tomography on orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;143(5):665–74.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Barghan S, Merrill R, Tetradis S. Cone beam computed tomography imaging in the evaluation of the temporomandibular joint. Tex Dent J. 2012;129(3):289–302.PubMed
30.
Kaur A, Natt AS, Mehra SK, Maheshwari K, Singh G. Improved visualization and assessment of condylar position in the glenoid fossa for different occlusions: a CBCT study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016;17(8):679–86.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Mischkowski RA, Pulsfort R, Ritter L, Neugebauer J, Brochhagen HG, Keeve E, et al. Geometric accuracy of a newly developed cone-beam device for maxillofacial imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;104(4):551–9.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Caruso S, Storti E, Nota A, Ehsani S, Gatto R. Temporomandibular joint anatomy assessed by CBCT images. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2916953.
33.
Al-Rawi NH, Uthman AT, Sodeify SM. Spatial analysis of mandibular condyles in patients with temporomandibular disorders and normal controls using cone beam computed tomography. Eur J Dent. 2017;11(1):99–105.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of condyle position in patients with Angle Class I, II, and III malocclusion using cone-beam computed tomography panoramic reconstructions
Publication date
01-01-2019
Published in
Oral Radiology / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0911-6028
Electronic ISSN: 1613-9674
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-018-0326-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Oral Radiology 1/2019 Go to the issue

Original Article

Prediction of malignancy of submandibular gland tumors with apparent diffusion coefficient

Editorial

Establishment of prize for AAOMFR best article

Original Article

Evaluation of trabecular pattern of mandible using fractal dimension, bone area fraction, and gray scale value: comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography

Case Report

Retrograde superselective intra-arterial chemoradiotherapy combined with hyperthermia and cetuximab for carcinoma of the buccal mucosa with N3 lymph node metastasis: a case report

Original Article

Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography diagnostic image quality using cluster signal-to-noise analysis

Correction

Correction to: Extranodal lymphoma arising within the maxillary alveolus: a systematic review