TMJ arthrosis: does the occlusal relationship really interfere? A comparison between cone beam computed tomography and dried skulls
- 47 Downloads
The aim of this study was to investigate the association between condylar bone morphological characteristics with occlusal conditions. Besides the study will compare the tomography images with the real condition in 122 temporomandibular joints from 61 skulls. The occlusal conditions were evaluated by number of teeth missing, measurement of overjet and overbite, in millimeters, and presence or absence of crossbite, openbite and dental rotation. The condylar bone morphological conditions were classified in five types (normal, presence of erosion, presence of osteophytes, flattening and/or deformation). This classification was used in real skulls and in Cone Beam Computed tomography (CBCT) images. The data were submitted to statistical analysis with a level of significance of 0.05. Occlusal variables have no association to morphologic data (p > 0.05). Normal condylar bone was seen in 62 CBCT versus 53 in real skulls while morphological alterations were seen in 60 CBCT versus 67-real condyles. The clinical and tomographic measurements were compared, demonstrating an important difference in the classification demonstrating poor association between detection methods (k − 0.3, p < 0.001). The occlusal conditions appear to have no correlation with the morphological condyle conditions. The CBCT is a reliable diagnostic method, although it may present divergences of findings when compared with clinical raw examination to morphologic condylar conditions.
KeywordsDental occlusion Mandibular condyle Skull
Compliance with ethical standards
All applicable institutional guidelines for the care and use of skulls were followed.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 3.Valladares-Neto J, Estrela C, Bueno MR, Guedes OA, Porto OCL, Pécora JD (2010) Mandibular condyle dimensional changes in subjects from 3 to 20 years of age using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: a preliminary study. Dental Press J Orthod 15:172–181. https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-94512010000500021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Uemura S, Nakamura M, Iwakasi H, Fuchihata H (1979) A roentgenologival study on temporomandibular joint disorders. Morphological changes of TMJ in arthrosis. Dent Radiol 19:224–237. https://doi.org/10.11242/dentalradiology1960.19.224 Google Scholar
- 10.Brothwell DR (1981) Digging up bones, 1st edn. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 11.Katzenberg MA, Saunders SR (2002) Biological anthropology of the human skeleton, 1st edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 13.Anjun S, Khan NA, Ahmad M (2014) Frequency, cause and effects of temporomandibular dysfunction syndrome among patients seen at Nishtar Institute of Dentistry. Pak Oral Dent J 84(1):54–56Google Scholar