Premium
Three‐dimensional morphological and positional analysis of the temporomandibular joint in adults with posterior crossbite: A cross‐sectional comparative study
Author(s) -
Almaqrami Bushra Sufyan,
Alhammadi Maged Sultan,
Tang Bojun,
ALyafrusee Enas Senan,
Hua Fang,
He Hong
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of oral rehabilitation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.991
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1365-2842
pISSN - 0305-182X
DOI - 10.1111/joor.13156
Subject(s) - condyle , temporomandibular joint , orthodontics , medicine , crossbite , cone beam computed tomography , malocclusion , dentistry , anatomy , computed tomography , surgery
Objectives The purpose of this study was to three‐dimensionally (3D) evaluate the morphological and positional features of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) in adults with unilateral and bilateral posterior crossbite compared with aligned control subjects. Materials and Methods This cross‐sectional comparative study analysed cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 90 adult subjects’ divided into three equal groups: bilateral posterior crossbite (BCG), unilateral posterior crossbite (UCG) and control group (CG). 3D measurements of the TMJ included the following: (a) position, angulation and inclination of the mandibular condyles; (b) centralisation of the condyles in their respective mandibular fossae; and (c) volumetric measurements of the TMJ spaces. Intra‐ and intergroup differences were identified using the paired Student's t test and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey's post hoc test, respectively. Results Regarding the intra‐group side‐based comparisons, there were significant differences in the anterior and superior joint spaces and the anteroposterior condylar joint position in the UCG. Intergroup comparisons revealed significant differences in the vertical condylar inclination, medial condylar position, condylar width and height, and volumetric joint space between the unaffected side of the UCG and left sides of the other groups. There were significant differences in the anteroposterior condylar inclination, medial condylar position, condylar width and height, anterior, posterior, superior and volumetric joint spaces, and anteroposterior condylar joint position between the crossbite side of the UCG and the right sides of the other groups. Conclusion Skeletal crossbite accompanied with characteristic morphological and positional TMJ features associated with unilateral posterior crossbite and are associated with side‐specific TMJ asymmetry.