S'abonner

Positional, morphologic, and volumetric differences in TMJ in unilateral posterior crossbites and controls: A retrospective CBCT study - 04/06/24

Doi : 10.1016/j.ortho.2024.100889 
Rebecca Dresner 1, Shivam Mehta 2, , Madhur Upadhyay 3, Tarek El-Bialy 4, Chia-Ling Kuo 6, Aditya Tadinada 7, Sumit Yadav 5
1 Private Practice, New York, NY, USA 
2 Department of Orthodontics, Texas A&M University School of Dentistry Dallas, 75246 Texas, USA 
3 Division of Orthodontics, Department of Craniofacial Sciences, Health Center Farmington, University of Connecticut, 06030 Connecticut, USA 
4 Division of Orthodontics, Department of Craniofacial Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 7-020D Katz Group Centre for Pharmacy and Health Research, University of Alberta, T6G 2E1 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 
5 Henry and Anne Cech Orthodontic Foundation, UNMC College of Dentistry and Children's Hospital and Medical Center Lincoln, Omaha, NE, USA 
6 Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Connecticut, Health Center, CT 06030 Farmington, USA 
7 Section of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Craniofacial SciencesUniversity of Connecticut, Health Center, CT 06030 Farmington, USA 

Shivam Mehta, Department of Orthodontics, Texas A&M University School of Dentistry Dallas, 75246 Texas, USA.Department of Orthodontics, Texas A&M University School of Dentistry DallasTexas75246USA

Summary

Objectives

The objective of this study was to evaluate if there are any morphologic, positional, and volumetric differences in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) of patients with unilateral posterior crossbite (UPC) compared to controls. Another objective was to analyse the discrepancy in the TMJ between the crossbite versus non-crossbite side in UPC versus right and left sides in controls. Additionally, this study aimed to evaluate the differences in the bone density at the masseteric insertion site at the angle of mandible in the UPC group and control group.

Material and methods

One hundred and thirty-two CBCTs were analysed with 66 patients in UPC group and 66 patients in control group (non-crossbite). Temporomandibular joint spaces – Anterior joint space (AJS), Superior joint space (SJS), Posterior joint space (PJS), Medial joint space (MJS), Middle joint space (MiJS), and Lateral joint space (LJS) were measured. Additionally, bone density at angle of mandible and volume of mandibular condyle were evaluated. The measurements were compared between the groups as well as between the crossbite and non-crossbite sides within the UPC group and between right and left sides within the control group. Furthermore, the associations between UPC and changes in TMJ regarding joint space availability, bone density, condylar head volume, and the effects of sex and age were evaluated using regression analysis.

Results

It was observed that UPC group showed a greater condylar volume, than the control group. Additionally, a larger mean discrepancy was observed between the crossbite side and non-crossbite side within the UPC group concerning condylar volume than controls. Concerning age, condylar volume was observed to be larger in adults than children. Adults showed significantly greater bone density and condylar volume than adolescents. Concerning sex, it was observed that males showed a larger SJS (right), MiJS, LJS, and bone density at the mandibular angle than females.

Conclusion

There is a difference in the TMJ parameters particularly condylar volume in patients with UPC compared to controls.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Temporomandibular joint, TMJ temporomandibular joint disorders, Unilateral posterior crossbite, Malocclusion, Cone-beam computed tomography, CBCT


Plan


© 2024  CEO. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 22 - N° 3

Article 100889- septembre 2024 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Impacted maxillary canine: Assessment of prevalence, severity and location of root resorption on maxillary incisors: A retrospective CBCT study
  • Wee Loon Ng, Andrea Cunningham, Nikolaos Pandis, Dirk Bister, Jadbinder Seehra
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • What are the prevalence and risk factors associated with wire syndrome in dental students? A cross-sectional study
  • Carole Charavet, Nathan Israel, Arlette Oueiss, Caterina Masucci, Eric Fontas, Sophie Myriam Dridi

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.