Investigation of Condyle Positions in Patients with Temporomandibular Joint Disorder by Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Öz

Objective: The condylar position refers to the location of the mandibular condyle within the glenoid fossa when the teeth are in maximum intercuspal, and it is an important indicator of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) function. This study aimed to assess the condylar position of the TMJ in patients with TMJ disorder using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: The present study utilized CBCT to evaluate the condylar position of the TMJ in a sample of 56 patients. Among them, 28 patients were asymptomatic while the remaining 28 had been diagnosed with TMJ disease. To evaluate the presence of TMJ disorders, the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders was employed. This diagnostic tool is widely used in clinical and research settings to assess TMJ-related pain and dysfunction. Results: The agreement was excellent, according to the intra-observer and inter-observer correlation values obtained. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age and gender distribution. The results showed that the anterior and posterior joint spaces were significantly higher in the symptomatic group compared to the asymptomatic group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of superior joint space and articular eminence inclination values. Gender did not create a significant difference in any parameter. Conclusion: The results of this study emphasize that CBCT images have an important role in detecting significant changes in condyle position in patients with TMJ disorders. However, further large-scale studies are necessary to validate and enhance the findings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Condyle position
• Cone-beam computed tomography
• Temporomandibular joint
• Temporomandibular joint disorder

Kaynakça

1. Weffort SYK, de Fantini SM. Condylar displacement between centric relation and maximum intercuspation in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(5):835-842. doi: 10.2319/090909-510.1
2. Bonilla-Aragon H, Tallents RH, Katzberg RW, Kyrkanides S, Moss ME. Condyle position as a predictor of temporomandibular joint internal derangement. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;82(2):205-208. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70157-5
3. İlgüy D, İlgüy M, Fişekçioğlu E, Dölekoğlu S, Ersan N. Articular eminence inclination, height, and condyle morphology on cone beam computed tomography. Scientific World Journal. 2014;2014:761714. doi:10.1155/2014/761714
4. Arieta-Miranda JM, Silva-Valencia M, Flores-Mir C, Paredes-Sampen NA, Arriola-Guillen LE. Spatial analysis of condyle position according to sagittal skeletal relationship, assessed by cone beam computed tomography. Prog Orthod. 2013;14:36. doi:10.1186/2196-1042-14-36
5. Schiffman E, Ohrbach R, Truelove E, et al. Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for clinical and research applications: recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group. J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2014;28(1):6-27. doi: 10.11607/jop.1151
6. Ren Y-F, Isberg A, Westesson P-L. Condyle position in the temporomandibular joint: Comparison between asymptomatic volunteers with normal disk position and patients with disk displacement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995;80(1):101-107. doi: 10.1016/s1079-2104(95)80025-5
7. Kurita H, Ohtsuka A, Kobayashi H, Kurashina K. A study of the relationship between the position of the condylar head and displacement of the temporomandibular joint disk. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2001;30(3):162-165. doi: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600603
8. Rodrigues AF, Fraga MR, Vitral RWF. Computed tomography evaluation of the temporomandibular joint in Class II Division 1 and Class III malocclusion patients: condylar symmetry and condyle-fossa relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(2):199-206. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.033

9. Ahmad M, Hollender L, Anderson Q, et al. Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (RDC/TMD): development of image analysis criteria and examiner reliability for image analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107(6):844-860. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.02.023
10. Pinto CA, da Rosa Caetano GF, Andrade MEA, et al. Dosimetric evaluation for temporomandibular joint cone beam computed tomography exams using different field of view. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2021;7(6):065013. doi: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac240a
11. Wang Y-H, Ma R-H, Li J-J, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of CBCT, MRI and CBCT–MRI fused images in determining anterior disc displacement and bone changes of temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2022;51(2):20210286. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20210286
12. Sümbüllü M, Çağlayan F, Akgül H, Yilmaz A. Radiological examination of the articular eminence morphology using cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41(3):234-240. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/24780643
13. Ahmed J, Sujir N, Shenoy N, Binnal A, Ongole R. Morphological Assessment of TMJ Spaces, Mandibular Condyle, and Glenoid Fossa Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT): A Retrospective Analysis. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2021;31(1):78-85. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1729488
14. Moscagiuri F, Caroccia F, Lopes C, et al. Evaluation of articular eminence inclination in normo-divergent subjects with different skeletal classes through CBCT. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(11):5992. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115992
15. Dowrkin S. Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique. J Craniomandib Disord. 1992;6:301-355.
16. Imanimoghaddam M, Madani AS, Mahdavi P, Bagherpour A, Darijani M, Ebrahimnejad H. Evaluation of condylar positions in patients with temporomandibular disorders: A cone-beam computed tomographic study. Imaging Sci Dent. 2016;46(2):127-131. doi: 10.5624/isd.2016.46.2.127
17. Cohen L. Measurement of Life Events; Cohen, LH, Ed.; Life Events and Psychological Functioning. Sage: Newbury Park, CA, USA; 1988.
18. Dalili Z, Khaki N, Kia SJ, Salamat F. Assessing joint space and condylar position in the people with normal function of temporomandibular joint with cone-beam computed tomography. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012;9(5):607-612. doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.104881
19. Martin D, Rozencweig S, Maté A, Valenzuela J. The importance of condyle position in the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of TMD. Orthod Fr. 2015;86(2):125-149. doi: 10.1051/orthodfr/2015018
20. Ikeda K, Kawamura A. Assessment of optimal condylar position with limited cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135(4):495-501. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.021
21. Solberg W, Hansson T, Nordström B. The temporomandibular joint in young adults at autopsy: a morphologic classification and evaluation. J Oral Rehabil. 1985;12(4):303-321. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1985.tb01285.x
22. Al-koshab M, Nambiar P, John J. Assessment of condyle and glenoid fossa morphology using CBCT in South-East Asians. PloS One. 2015;10(3):e0121682. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121682
23. Yasa Y, Akgül HM. Comparative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of the osseous morphology of the temporomandibular joint in temporomandibular dysfunction patients and asymptomatic individuals. Oral Radiol. 2018;34(1):31-39. doi: 10.1007/s11282-017-0279-7
24. Christiansen EL, Thompson JR, Zimmerman G, et al. Computed tomography of condylar and articular disk positions within the temporomandibular joint. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1987;64(6):757-767. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(87)90182-4
25. Incesu L, Taşkaya-Yılmaz N, Öğütcen-Toller M, Uzun E. Relationship of condylar position to disc position and morphology. Eur J Radiol. 2004;51(3):269-273. doi: 10.1016/S0720-048X(03)00218-3