Temporomandibuler Eklem Kondil Şekillerinin Dağılımlarının Dijital Panoramik Radyograflar ile İncelenmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Temporomandibular eklem kondili, yaş, cinsiyet, oklüzal kuvvet, maloklüzyon ve iskeletsel patern gibi birçok sayıda faktörün etkisiyle zaman içinde yeniden şekillenebilmektedir. Kondil şeklinde oluşan bu değişiklik, dejeneratif eklem hastalığının çeşitli semptomlarına yol açabilir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, … Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi'ne başvuran hastalarda farklı yaş gruplarında mandibuler kondilin farklı morfolojilerini panoramik radyografi yardımıyla araştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Toplam 681 panoramik radyografi ile yapılan bu çalışmada, çalışma grubu 15-55 yaş arası 399 kadın ve 282 erkek bireyden oluşmaktadır. Mandibular kondilin artiküler eminens ve glenoid fossa bölgeleri incelenerek şekilleri belirlenmiştir. Mandibular kondil morfolojisi oval, kuş gagası, elmas, düz, çarpık parmak ve bifid olmak üzere altı tipte sınıflandırılmıştır. Gruplar arası farklar Ki-kare ve McNemar testleri yardımıyla analiz edilmiştir. (p<0,05) Bulgular: 681 hastaya ait toplam 1362 sağ ve sol kondil incelenmiştir. Altı kondil tipi arasında yaş ve cinsiyet farkı gözetmeksizin en yaygın görülen şekil oval kondil morfolojisi olarak saptanırken, bunu sırasıyla düz, elmas, çarpık parmak, kuş gagası ve bifid kondil şekilleri izlenmiştir. Sonuç: Farklı yaşlardaki bireylerde kondil şekillerinin panoramik radyograflarda incelenmesi sonucunda, temporomandibular eklem kondilinin zaman içinde yeniden şekillenme süreci gözlenmiştir. Yaş grupları arasında tespit edilen farklılıkların, bireyin artan yaşı ile birlikte kondilin maruz kaldığı fonksiyonel yükleme miktarının birikimsel artışı ile ilişkili olduğu düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

• Temporomandibular eklem
• Ortodonti
• Panoramic Radiography

Evaluation of Mandibular Condyle Shape Distribution Using Digital Panoramic Images

Abstract

Objective: The human condyle is capable of remodelling over time as numerous factors such as age, sex, occlusal force, malocclusion, and skeletal relationship influence this remodelling. This change in shape can lead to the numerous symptoms of degenerative joint disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the different morphologies of the condyle in different age groups at the Faculty of Dentistry, …. University, …., using orthopantomography. Material and Method: A total of 681 panoramic radiographs obtained for this study. The study group consists of 399 female and 282 male individuals aged between 15-55 years. Articular eminence and glenoid fossa regions of the mandibular condyle was traced. The mandibular condyle morphology was classified into six types such as oval, birdbeak, diamond, flat, crooked finger and bifid. Intergroup differences were evaluated with Chi-square and McNemar tests. (p<0.05) Result: A total of 1362 right and left condyles of 681 patients were examined. The most common shape among the six condylar types -regardless of age and gender- was oval condylar morphology, followed by flat, diamond-shaped, crooked finger, birdbeak, and bifid. Conclusion: As a result of the examination of condyle shapes in individuals with different ages on panoramic radiographs, the process of remodelling of the temporomandibular joint condyle over time was observed. The differences found between the age groups are interpreted to be related to the cumulative increase in the amount of functional loading to which the condyle is exposed with increasing age.

Keywords

• Temporomandibular Joint
• Orthodontics
• Panoramik Radyograf

References

1. Ahn S-J, Kim T-W, Lee D-Y, Nahm D-S. Evaluation of internal derangement of the temporomandibular joint by panoramic radiographs compared with magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129(4):479-485.
2. Al-Saedi AIL, Riad A, Al-Jasim NH, Bahaa A. A panoramic study of the morphology of mandibular condyle in a sample of population from basrah city. Int j morphol 2020;38(6):1707-1712.
3. Alpaslan S, Ozbek M, Hersek N, Kanli A, Avcu N, Firat M. Bilateral bifid mandibular condyle. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004;33(4):274-277.
4. Anisuzzaman MM, Khan SR, Khan MTI, Abdullah MK, Afrin A. Evaluation of mandibular condylar morphology by orthopantomogram in Bangladeshi population. Update Dent Coll J 2019;9(1):29-31.
5. Bae S, Park MS, Han JW, Kim YJ. Correlation between pain and degenerative bony changes on cone-beam computed tomography images of temporomandibular joints. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2017;39(1):19.
6. Blasberg B, Greenberg M. Temporomandibular disorders. M. Glick. Burket’s oral medicine diagnosis and treatment. BC Decker. Ontario: 2003. p.271-306.
7. Crow HC, Parks E, Campbell JH, Stucki DS, Daggy J. The utility of panoramic radiography in temporomandibular joint assessment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005;34(2):91-95.
8. Dahlström L, Lindvall AM. Assessment of temporomandibular joint disease by panoramic radiography: reliability and validity in relation to tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996;25(4):197-201.

9. Egloff C, Hügle T, Valderrabano V. Biomechanics and pathomechanisms of osteoarthritis. Swiss Med Wkly 2012;142(2930):w13583-w13583.
10. Epstein JB, Caldwell J, Black G. The utility of panoramic imaging of the temporomandibular joint in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001;92(2):236-239.
11. Gupta A, Acharya G, Singh H, Poudyal S, Redhu A, Shivhare P. Assessment of Condylar Shape through Digital Panoramic Radiograph among Nepalese Population: A Proposal for Classification. Biomed Res Int 2022;2022(6820824).
12. Hegde S, Praveen B, Shetty SR. Morphological and radiological variations of mandibular condyles in health and diseases: a systematic review. Dentistry 2013;3(1):154.
13. Honda E, Yoshino N, Sasaki T. Condylar appearance in panoramic radiograms of asymptomatic subjects and patients with temporomandibular disorders. Oral Radiol 1994;10(43-53).
14. Jawahar A, Maragathavalli G. Analysis of Condylar Morphological Variations Using Digital Panoramic Radiographs-A Retrospective Study. Indian J Public Health Res Dev 2019;10(11):3450-3453.
15. Khanal P, Pranaya K. Study of mandibular condyle morphology using orthopantomogram. Journal of Nepal Dental Association 2020;20(1):3-7.
16. Kikuchi K, Takeuchi S, Tanaka E, Shibaguchi T, Tanne K. Association between condylar position, joint morphology and craniofacial morphology in orthodontic patients without temporomandibular joint disorders. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30(11):1070-1075.
17. Momjian A, Courvoisier D, Kiliaridis S, Scolozzi P. Reliability of computational measurement of the condyles on digital panoramic radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40(7):444-450.
18. Nagaraj T, Nigam H, Santosh H, Gogula S, Sumana C, Sahu P. Morphological variations of the coronoid process, condyle and sigmoid notch as an adjunct in personal identification. J. Med. Radiol. Pathol. Surg. 2017;4(2):1-5.
19. Pereira Jr FJ, Lundh H, Westesson P-L. Morphologic changes in the temporomandibular joint in different age groups: an autopsy investigation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78(3):279-287.
20. Ribeiro EC, Sanches ML, Alonso LG, Smith RL, Ribeiro E, Sanches M, SMITH R. Shape and symmetry of human condyle and mandibular fossa. Int J Odontostomatol 2015;9(1):65-72.
21. Scapino R. Morphology and mechanism of the jaw joint. I. M. C. Science and Practice of Occlusion. Chicago, Quintessence: 1997. p.23-40.
22. Shaikh A, Ahmed S, Ahmed A, Das G, Taqi M, Nisar S, Khan O. Assessment of radiographic morphology of mandibular condyles: a radiographic study. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2022;81(2):481-486.
23. Singh B, Kumar NR, Balan A, Nishan M, Haris P, Jinisha M, Denny CD. Evaluation of normal morphology of mandibular condyle: a radiographic survey. J Clin Imaging Sci 2020;10
24. Singh M, Chakrabarty A. Anatomical Variations in Condylar Shape and Symmetry: Study of 100 Patients. Int J Sci Res 2015;4(5-611).
25. Solberg WK, Hansson TL, Nordström B. The temporomandibular joint in young adults at autopsy: a morphologic classification and evaluation. J Oral Rehabil 1985;12(4):303-321.
26. Sonal V, Sandeep P, Kapil G, Christine R. Evaluation of condylar morphology using panoramic radiography. J Adv Clin Res Insights 2016;3(1):5-8.
27. Tanaka E, Detamore M, Mercuri L. Degenerative disorders of the temporomandibular joint: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. J Dent Res 2008;87(4):296-307.
28. Tanimoto K, Petersson A, Rohlin M, Hansson L, Johansen C. Comparison of computed with conventional tomography in the evaluation of temporomandibular joint disease: a study of autopsy specimens. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1990;19(1):21-27.
29. Ulhuq A. Cysts of the oral and maxillofacial regions. Br Dent J 2008;204(4):217-217.
30. Wang X, Kou X, Mao J, Gan Y, Zhou Y. Sustained inflammation induces degeneration of the temporomandibular joint. J Dent Res 2012;91(5):499-505.
31. Westesson P-L. Reliability and validity of imaging diagnosis of temporomandibular joint disorder. Adv Dent Res 1993;7(2):137-151.