CT-based 3D morphometric reference data on osseous TMJ subunits in a European cohort: relevance for patient-specific implant research.

BACKGROUND

Patient-specific alloplastic prostheses are increasingly used for reconstruction of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). However, the extent to which articulating implant components should reflect native osseous TMJ morphology remains unresolved. This study used CT-derived three-dimensional (3D) virtual-digital surface models to analyze osseous TMJ subunits in humans and provide morphometric reference data for future patient-specific TMJ implant research.

METHODS

In this retrospective exploratory study, 97 computed tomography (CT) scans from Hannover Medical School were analyzed. High-quality 3D virtual-digital models of the articulating TMJ subunits, including the mandibular condyle and glenoid fossa, were generated and used to measure relevant TMJ parameters. Parameters were compared according to sex and age, and correlation analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Morphometric variability was observed among the osseous TMJ subunits. Men showed larger medial-lateral diameters of the mandibular condyle, greater articular tubercle height, and larger zygomatic arch root dimensions. Women showed a larger anterior-posterior diameter of the glenoid fossa. Middle-aged participants showed a larger anterior-posterior diameter of the mandibular condyle and larger sagittal dimensions of the zygomatic arch root compared with young-aged participants. Correlation analysis revealed associations between selected parameters, particularly between zygomatic arch root diameter and articular tubercle height.

CONCLUSION

This study provides CT-based 3D morphometric reference data on osseous TMJ subunits in a European cohort. The findings indicate inter-individual morphometric variability and exploratory sex- and age-related differences in selected parameters. These data may provide anatomical reference information for future patient-specific TMJ implant research. However, the present study does not evaluate implant fit, mandibular kinematics, biomechanical performance, or clinical outcomes. Therefore, the translational relevance of these findings requires further validation.