Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2020
Does TMJ Function and Imaging Tools Help Differentiate Between Condylar Resorption and Mandibular Hypoplasia?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abukawa Harutsugi, Ogawa Takashi, Kobayashi Masahiko, Suzuki Iwao, Chikazu Daichi, Shimada Jun
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Differentiating between bilateral condylar resorption (CR) and mandibular hypoplasia (MH) can be challenging owing to the difficulty in chronological observation and establishing standardized measurements. The purpose of the present study was to assess whether temporomandibular joint (TMJ) function can distinguish between CR and MH and clarify the essential diagnostic imaging tools for CR.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of patients with mandibular retrognathia. The primary predictor variables were a clinical dysfunction score for the TMJ, mandibular plane angle (MPA), SNA angle, SNB angle, and cortical erosion score in the condylar heads. The demographic variables were age, anterior disc displacement, and previous orthodontic treatment. The anatomic variable was the condylar height (CH). The primary outcome variable was the disease status (CR or MH). The patients were divided into the CR group and MH group. The patients with CR were selected on the basis of a CH value of less than 22 mm. TMJ function was assessed using the Helkimo clinical dysfunction index. The CH on panoramic radiographs was measured using the Kjellberg method. The MPA, SNA angle, and SNB angle were analyzed using cephalometric analysis. Cortical erosion in the condylar head was assessed using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.
RESULTS: A total of 23 female participants were enrolled in the present study. The average clinical dysfunction score for the TMJ was 4.4 in the CR group and 0.4 in the MH group (P < .05). The average MPA was 41.2° in the CR group and 35.5° in the MH group (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The present investigation has shown that assessing TMJ function and analyzing MPA using a cephalometric radiograph can differentiate CR from MH.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of patients with mandibular retrognathia. The primary predictor variables were a clinical dysfunction score for the TMJ, mandibular plane angle (MPA), SNA angle, SNB angle, and cortical erosion score in the condylar heads. The demographic variables were age, anterior disc displacement, and previous orthodontic treatment. The anatomic variable was the condylar height (CH). The primary outcome variable was the disease status (CR or MH). The patients were divided into the CR group and MH group. The patients with CR were selected on the basis of a CH value of less than 22 mm. TMJ function was assessed using the Helkimo clinical dysfunction index. The CH on panoramic radiographs was measured using the Kjellberg method. The MPA, SNA angle, and SNB angle were analyzed using cephalometric analysis. Cortical erosion in the condylar head was assessed using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.
RESULTS: A total of 23 female participants were enrolled in the present study. The average clinical dysfunction score for the TMJ was 4.4 in the CR group and 0.4 in the MH group (P < .05). The average MPA was 41.2° in the CR group and 35.5° in the MH group (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The present investigation has shown that assessing TMJ function and analyzing MPA using a cephalometric radiograph can differentiate CR from MH.