Comparison of condylar position between Angle Class I and Class Ⅱ malocclusion in teenagers

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To analyze and compare the difference of condylar position between Angle Class I and Class Ⅱ malocclusion patients using cone-beam CT (CBCT). METHODS: Thirty Class I patients, 30 Class Ⅱ division 1 patients and 30 Class Ⅱ division 2 patients were selected in this study. Each patient underwent CBCT. The images in the oblique position perpendicular to the condyloid process were reconstructed by Examvision software. The joint space was measured by Exam Vision software. The data were processed with SPSS17.0 software package. RESULTS: The upper joint space was larger in Class Ⅱ, the posterior joint space was smaller in Class Ⅱ patients; and in Class Ⅱ division 1 patients, both of the upper and anterior joint spaces were larger than in Class Ⅱ division 2 patients,the differences were significant (P<0.05). The length of condyle was longer in Class I patients than in Class Ⅱ patients. CONCLUSIONS: The condylar position in Class Ⅱ division 2 patients was lower and further backward. The length of condyle is shortest in Class Ⅱ division 2 patients.

Key words: Temporomandibular joint, Angle Class Ⅱ, malocclusion, Cone-beam CT

CLC Number:

R783.5

GU Yong-jia, LU Sheng-nan, GAO Mei-qin, GU Xin-yu, SHI Hui, MA Jun-qing. Comparison of condylar position between Angle Class I and Class Ⅱ malocclusion in teenagers[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2016, 25(6): 694-696.

References

[1] Haralur SB, Addas MK, Othman HI, et al. Prevalence of malocclusion, its association with occlusal interferences and temporomandibular disorders among the Saudi sub-population [J]. Oral Health Dent Manag, 2014, 13(2): 164-169.
[2] Hobo S, Mochizuki S. A kinematic investigation of mandibular border movement by means of an electronic measuring system. Part I: Development of the measuring system [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1983, 50(3): 368-373.
[3] Braun S, Hicken JS. Ultrasound imaging of condylar motion: a preliminary report [J]. Angle Orthod, 2000, 70(5): 383-386.
[4] 谷岩. 以种植体法研究7.5~15.5 岁个体髁突的生长变化 [J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2007, 23(1): 83-86.
[5] Ikeda K, Kawamura A. Assessment of optimal condylar position with limited cone-beam computed tomography [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2009, 135(3): 495-501.
[6] 史建陆, 檀巧林, 王智军, 等. 锥形束CT对错畸形髁突位置关系研究 [J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2012, 5(5): 295-298
[7] 孙岩. 安氏Ⅱ类1分类错患者颞下颌关节CBCT测量值分析 [D]. 广州: 中山大学, 2010.
[8] 李帅, 林薇薇, 陈金武, 等. 成人Angle Ⅱ 2 错畸形患者髁突位置及颞下颌关节形态的CBCT观察研究 [J].实用口腔医学杂志, 2013, 29(3): 389-392
[9] Arnett W, McLaughlin RP. Facial and dental planning for orthodentists and oral surgeons[M]. St.Louis: Mosby, 2005: 145-146.
[10] Pullinger AG, Hollender L, Solberg WK, et al. A tomographic study of mandibular condyle position in an asymptomatic population [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1985, 53(5): 706-713.
[11] Oberg T, Carlson EG, Fajers CM. The temporomandibular joint. A morphologic study of human autopsy material[J]. Acta Odont Scand, 1971, 29(3): 349-384.
[12] Wright DM, Moffet BC Jr. The postnatal development of the human temporomandibular joint [J]. Am J Anat, 1974, 141(2): 235-250.
[13] Scott HJ. Growth changes in the glenoid fossa[J]. Dental Pract, 1955, 6(2): 117-120.
[14] Katsavrias EG. Morphology of the temporomandibular joint in subjects with Class Ⅱ division 2 malocclusions [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006, 129(4): 470-478.
[15] 张冬林, 乐群, 费瑛, 等. 安氏Ⅱ 2 错正畸治疗前后髁突位置的锥束CT观察[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2011, 27(11): 675-677.
[16] 谢荣敏. 安氏Ⅱ类2分类错畸形正畸治疗前后髁突运动轨迹特征的对比研究 [D]. 重庆: 重庆医科大学, 2009: 53.