Evaluation of Distribution of Mandibular Asymmetry

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of mandibular asymmetry in patients in Ankara and to determine whether the presence of asymmetry in patients with midline deviations and / or

is to investigate the effect on stenosis. Materials and method: Kjellberg analysis was performed on panoramic x-rays to detect condylar asymmetry in 111 randomly selected patients with models, panoramic and posteroanterior X-rays in the patient records, and condylar asymmetry was performed in 53 patients. It has been determined. Patients with asymmetry according to ANB and GoGn / SN values are classified. In addition, condylar asymmetry deviates from the midline and space restriction Pearson's chi-square test and one-way ANOVA test were used to examine its relationship with. Results: 47.7% of randomly selected patients were found to have condylar asymmetry. Of 53 patients with condylar asymmetry, 31 had negative ANB values, 10 of them with normal ANB values ​​(0-4), 12 of them have ANB values ​​more than 4 degrees are patients. Only 1 of the same 53 patients have GoGn / SN angle less than 28 degrees, 20 patients had GoGn / SN angle values ​​between 28 and 36 degrees and 32 patients more than 36 degrees.  There is a significant difference between condylar asymmetry and midline deviation for the left side. While no relationship was found for the left side, it was found for the right side. Conclusion: As a result, the presence of condylar asymmetry for the but there was no relationship between asymmetry and space restriction. Conflicting results were obtained with line deviation. Patients with asymmetry are large The ratio are individuals of Angle class 3. The rate of asymmetry was also higher in individuals with increased vertical direction angle.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• asymmetry
• Kjellberg
• condillary

MANDİBULER ASİMETRİ DAĞILIMININ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Ankara'daki hastalarda mandibuler asimetrinin prevalansının saptanması ve asimetri varlığının hastalarda orta hat sapmaları ve/ve ya yer darlığı üzerindeki etkisinin araştırılmasıdır. Gereç-Yöntem: Hasta kayıtlarında modelleri, panoramik ve posteroanterior röntgenleri olan rastgele seçilmiş 111 adet hastada kondiler asimetri saptamak için panoramik röntgenler üzerinden Kjellberg analizi yapılmış ve 53 hastada kondiler asimetri olduğu saptanmıştır. Asimetriye sahip hastalar ANB ve GoGn/SN değerlerine göre sınıflandırılmışlardır. Ayrıca kondiler asimetrinin orta hat sapmasına ve yer darlığı ile ilişkisine pearson ki kare testi ve tek yönlü ANOVA testi ile bakılmıştır. Bulgular: Rastgele seçilen hastaların %47,7 si kondiler asimetriye sahip bulunmuştur. Kondiler asimetriye sahip 53 hastanın 31'i negatif ANB değerine sahip, 10 tanesi normal ANB değerlerinde (0-4), 12 tanesi ise 4 dereceden fazla ANB değerine sahip hastalardır. Aynı 53 hastanın sadece 1'i 28 dereceden düşük GoGn/SN açısına sahip, 20 hasta 28-36 derece arası ve 32 hasta ise 36 dereceden fazla GoGn/SN açı değerine sahiptir. Kondiler asimetri ile orta hat sapması arasında sol taraf için anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamışken, sağ taraf için bulunmuştur. Sonuç: Sonuç olarak Ankara bölgesindeki hastalar için kondiler asimetri varlığı değer olarak fazla bulunmuş fakat asimetri ile yer darlığı arasında ilişki gözlenmemiş, orta hat sapması ile çelişkili sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Asimetriye sahip hastalar büyük oranda Angle sınıf 3 bireylerdir ve dik yön açısı artmış bireylerde de asimetri oranı daha fazla bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• asimetri
• kondiler
• Kjellberg

Kaynakça

1. Thiesen G, Gribel BF, Pereira KC, Freitas MP. Is there an association between skeletal asymmetry and tooth absence? Dental Press J Orthod. 2016; 21:73-9.
2. Persson M. Mandibular asymmetry of hereditary origin. Am J Orthod 1973; 63:1-11.
3. Costa, R.L. JR.: Asymmetry of the mandibular condyle in Haida Indians. Am J Phys Anthropol 1986; 70: 119-123.
4. Akcam MO, Altiok T, Ozdiler E. Panoramic radiographs: A tool for investigating skeletal pattern. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:175-81.
5. Kjellberg H, Ekestubbe A, Kiliaridis S, Thilander B. Condylar height on panoramic radiographs. A methodologic study with a clinical application, Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 1994; 52: 43-50.
6. Costa, R.L. JR. Age, sex, and antemortem loss of teeth in prehistoric Eskimo samples from Point Hope and Kodiak Island, Alaska American Journal of Physical Anthropology 1980; 52: 501-14.
7. Miller, V.J., Bodner, L. Condylar asymmetry measurements in patients with an Angle's Class III malocclusion. J Oral Rehabil. 1997; 24: 247-249.
8. Miller, V.J., Smidt, A.: Condylar asymmetry and age in patients with an Angle's Class II division 2 malocclusion. J Oral Rehabil. 1996; 23: 712-715.

9. Fuentes, R.; Engelke, W.; Bustos, L.; Oporto, G.; Borie, E.; Sandoval, P.; Garay, I.; Bizama, M. & Borques, P. Reliability of tow radiographic methods to assess condilar asymmetry. Int. J. Morphol.,201; 29(3): 694-701.
10. Habets, L. L.; Bezuur, J. N.; Naeiji, M., Hansson, T. L. The Orthopantomogram, an aid in diagnosis of temporomandibular joint problems. II. The vertical symmetry. J. Oral Rehabil. 1988; 15(5):465-71.
11. Iturrıaga, V.; Navarro, P.; Cantín, M., Fuentes, R. Prevalence of vertical condilar asymmetry of the temporomandibular joint in patients with signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders. Int. J. Morphol. 2012; 30(1):315-321.
12. Severt TR, Proffit WR. The prevalence of facial asymmetry in the dentofacial deformities population at the University of North Carolina. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1997;12(3):171–176.
13. Samman N, Tong AC, Cheung DL, Tideman H. Analysis of 300 dentofacial deformities in Hong Kong. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1992;7(3):181–185.
14. Thiesen G, Gribel BF, Freitas MPM. Facial asymmetry a current review. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015;20(6):110–125.
15. Halicioglu K, Celikoglu M, Buyuk SK, Sekerci AE, Candirli C. Effects of early unilateral mandibular first molar extraction on condylar and ramal vertical asymmetry. Eur J Dent. 2014;8(2):178–183.
16. Sancak Ö., Özdiler E., Gündüz E, Köklü A., Bantleon H.P. Analyse vertikaler Gesichtsveränderungen mithilfe von Panoramaröntgenaufnahmen. Inf Orthod Kieferorthop 2012; 44: 9–12.
17. Bajaj K, Rathee P, Jain P, Panwar VR. Comparison of the Reliability of Anatomic Landmarks based on PA Cephalometric Radiographs and 3D CT Scans in Patients with Facial Asymmetry. International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry, September-December 2011; 4:213-223.
18. Eun-Ja Kim, Eun-Jung Ki, Hae-Myung Cheon, Eun-Joo Choi, Kyung-Hwan Kwon. 3- Dimensional analysis for class III malocclusion patients with facial asymmetry J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;39:168-174.
19. Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics Signorelli, L., Patcas, R., Peltomäki, T. et al. J Orofac Orthop 2016; 77: 9.