| Literature DB >> 35155678 |
Sebastian Dygas1, Izabela Szarmach1, Ilona Radej1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available knowledge about disorders of temporomandibular joint structures and their association with orthodontic variables are still lacking.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35155678 PMCID: PMC8826117 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6863014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The inclusion and inclusion and exclusion criteria.
| Inclusion criteria | Papers that evaluated the effects of orthodontic variables on the temporomandibular joint using cone-beam computed tomography imaging: |
| Papers that evaluated the effects of orthodontic variables on the temporomandibular joint using cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint: | |
| Exclusion criteria | (i) Case reports, comments, interviews, authors' debates, editorials, letters, and review articles |
Figure 1Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) search strategy flowchart; ∗MEDLINE records excluded.
Summary of the descriptive characteristics of included articles regarding degenerative changes; ∗statistically significant; F: female; M: male; n/a: not available; kV: kilo voltage; mA: milliampere; FOV: field of view.
| Reference | Population (country) | Average age (y.o.) | Gender | CBCT acquisitions | Number of patients/joints evaluated | Number of investigators evaluating changes in CBCT | Main group classification | Assessed orthodontic variables | Assessed degenerations | % of overall joints with TMJ osseous alterations | Most frequently occurring degenerations | Main correlations and conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kang et al. [ | South Korea | 14.2 (adolescents) | 95 F, 0 M | 100 kV, 9.0 mA, FOV 14 × 12 cm, 0.3 mm voxel | 95/190 | n/a | (1) By age and gender | SNA, SNB, ANB, N-A, N-ANS, N-B, N-Pog, Ar-Go, S-Go/N-Me, N-S-Ar, Ar-Go-Me, N-Go-Ar, N-Go-Me, N-S-Gn, SN/Go-Me, FMA, FMIA, IMPA, | Flattening, osteophyte, erosion, sclerosis, resorption, | 46.3% | n/a | (1) ∗More retrognathic mandible, larger FMA, |
| Dadgar-Yeganeh et al. [ | USA | n/a (adolescents and adults) | 198 F, 75 M | 120 kV, 18.45-47.74 mA, FOV n/a, voxel n/a | 273/546 | 4 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | MP-SN | Remodeling, erosion, flattening, sclerosis, osteophytes, subcondylar bone cysts, joint space narrowing joint congruence | 12.8% | n/a | (1) ∗Smaller condylar, ramus and mandibular height in DJD group |
| Chen et al. [ | China | 24.1 (adults) | 83 F, 0 M | 90 kV, 7.0 mA, FOV 16 × 10 cm, voxel n/a | 83/166 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | SNA, SNB, ANB, MP-SN, Pg to | Flattening, osteophyte, erosion, subcortical sclerosis, subcortical cyst, hypoplasia,short condyle, generalized sclerosis | 52.4% | Short condyles | (1) ∗The smallest S-Go, the highest MP-SN and the most retruded mandible in the OA group |
| Walewski et al. [ | Brazil | n/a (adults) | 116 F, 97 M | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV n/a, 0.3 mm voxel | 213/426 | 2 | (1) By age | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Flattening, osteophyte, erosion, deviation in form, subcortical sclerosis, subcortical cyst, hypoplasia | 52.3% | Flattening | (1) No differences regarding OA among different skeletal patterns, gender or age groups |
| Krisjane et al. [ | Latvia | 20.3 (adolescents and adults) | n/a | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV 17 × 17 cm, 0.4 mm voxel | 117/234 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Flattening, osteophyte, erosion, deviation in form, subcortical sclerosis, subcortical cyst, hypoplasia, hyperplasia | 42.7% | Flattening | (1) ∗The highest OA incidence in skeletal and dental class II malocclusion |
| Tran Duy et al. [ | Taiwan | 24.5 (adults) | 85 F, 0 M | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV 16 × 22 cm, 0.4 mm voxel | 85/170 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | SNA, SNB, FMA, SN-GoGn, Wits, Pog-Nv, overbite, overjet | Flattening, osteophyte, erosion, subcortical sclerosis, pseudocyst, generalized sclerosis | n/a | n/a | (1) ∗Higher incidence of degenerative changes in skeletal class III malocclusion patients with ≥3 mm chin deviation |
Summary of the descriptive characteristics of included articles regarding TMJ condylar shape; ∗statistically significant; F: female; M: male; n/a: not available; kV: kilo voltage; mA: milliampere; FOV: field of view.
| Reference | Population (country) | Average age (y.o.) | Gender | CBCT acquisitions | Number of patients/joints evaluated | Number of investigators evaluating changes in CBCT | Main group classification | Assessed orthodontic variables | CBCT plane for the condyle assessment | Classification by the condyle shape | % distribution of condyles according to the assigned classification | Main correlations and conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yalcin et al. [ | Turkey | 42.31 (adults) | 458 F, 452 M | 120 kV, 5 mA, FOV 16 × 9 and 16 × 16 cm | 910/1820 | 2 | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I, II, and III molar relationship | Coronal | (1) Convex | (1) Convex (40.6%) | (1) ∗Correlation between Angle's classification and shape of the condyle in the right condyle, no correlation in the left condyle |
| Merigue et al. [ | Brazil | 16.4 (adolescent and adults) | F and M (detailed distribution n/a) | 120 kV, 36.9 mA, FOV 13 × 23 cm | 49/98 | 1 | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I and II division 1 molar relationship | Coronal | (1) Round | (1) Flat or convex (66%) | (1) No correlation between malocclusion and shape of the condyle |
| Kurusu et al. [ | Japan | 24 (adults) | 40 F | 80 kV, 7 mA, FOV n/a | 40/80 | 1 | (1) By sagittal skeletal pattern and Angle's classification | SNA, SNB, Occ-FH, MP-FH, Gonial angle, ramus inclination N-Me, S-Go | Coronal and axial | Individual assessment at 30° intervals form the center of the long axis | n/a | (1) ∗Correlation between occlusal forces and mandibular plane angle-the bigger MP-FH the lower the forces |
| Park et al. [ | South Korea | 25.52 (adults) | 34 F, 26 M | 80 kV, 5 mA, FOV 20 × 17.9 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | SN-GoMe angle | Saggital | 1. Normal (round and oval) | (1) Normal (72.5%) | (1) ∗Hypodivergent group showed significant ratio of oval condyles |
| Contro et al. [ | USA | n/a (adults) | 169 F, 73 M | 120 kV, 18.45-47.74 mA, FOV n/a | 242/484 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | MP-SN, Ar-Go-Me, S-Go/N-Me, Id-Pg-MP (mandibular symphysis morphology) | Coronal, axial and saggital | Individual assessment based on Procrustes analysis | n/a | (1) Axial view: dolichofacial group showed concave anterior surface of the condyle, brachyfacial group showed convex anterior surface |
Summary of the descriptive characteristics of included articles regarding joint space and condylar position; ∗statistically significant; F: female; M: male; n/a: not available; kV: kilo voltage; mA: milliampere; FOV: field of view; TMDs: temporomandibular joint disorders.
| Reference | Population (country) | Average age (years) | Gender | CBCT acquisitions | Number of patients/joints evaluated | Number of investigators evaluating changes in CBCT | Main group classification | Assessed orthodontic variables | CBCT plane for joint space assessment | Mutual relationship of dental arches during CBCT acquisition | Main correlations and conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lin et al. [ | China | 22.46 (adolescents and adults) | 60 F, 0 M | 120 kV, 5 mA, FOV 17 × 23 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By vertical and dentoskeletal facial pattern | FH-MP, SN-GoGN, skeletal pattern, molar class relationship | Sagittal | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) ∗Correlation regarding posterior joint space: highest values in the high-angle group and lowest in the low-angle group |
| Noh et al. [ | South Korea | 23.5 (adults) | 83 F, 48 M | 80 kV, 5.0-8.0 mA, FOV 15.4 × 15.4 cm | 131/262 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | SN-MP, ANB. Angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Sagittal | n/a | (1) ∗Superior joint space: lower values in the hyperdivergent patient group compared with other groups |
| Arieta-Miranda et al. [ | Peru | 25 (adults) | n/a | 90 kV, 8 mA, FOV 20 × 19 cm | 45/90 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), SGo/Nme relationship | Sagittal | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) ∗Superior joint space: lower values in skeletal the class II and III group compared to the class I group |
| Chae et al. [ | South Korea | n/a (adolescents) | 64 F, 54 M | 80 kV, 60 mA, FOV 19.97 × 19.97 cm | 120/240 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), Sgo/Nme relationship | Sagittal and frontal | Centric occlusion | (1) No differences in condylar position in the glenoid fossa |
| Paknahad et al. [ | Iran | 25.2 (adults) | n/a | 120 kV, 4.6 mA, FOV 15 × 15 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Sagittal | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) ∗Anterior joint space: lower values in class II compared to classes I and III |
| Song et al. [ | China | 18.11 (adolescents and adults) | 63 F, 60 M | n/a | 123/246 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II and III), FMA angle, APDI, position of the anterior teeth, overbite | Sagittal | n/a | (1) ∗Posterior joint space: higher values in the class II division 2 group compared with the other groups |
| Gorucu-Coskuner et al. [ | Turkey | 11.4 (adolescents) | 14 F, 14 M | 120 kV, 3.8 mA, FOV 19 × 24 cm | 28/48 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal class II div 1 and 2), | Sagittal and axial | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) ∗Anterior joint space: higher values in class II division 1 group compared to the class II division 2 group |
| Kaur et al. [ | India | n/a (adults) | n/a | 85 kV, 10 mA, FOV 17 × 13.5 cm | 45/90 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Sagittal and frontal | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) Sagittal plane condyles position: class I: anterosuperior; class II: posterosuperior; class III: more anterosuperior than in class I |
| Alhammadi et al. [ | Egypt | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 60/120 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Sagittal, axial, and frontal | n/a | (1) ∗Anterior joint space: highest values in the class II group |
| Mishra et al. [ | Nepal | 10.8 (adolescents) | 8 F, 12 M | n/a | 20/40 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I and III) | Sagittal, axial, and frontal | n/a | (1) No differences in condylar position in the glenoid fossa |
| Lobo et al. [ | Brazil | n/a (adults) | 90 F, 90 M | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV 17 × 23 cm | 180/360 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | Sagittal | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) No differences in anterior joint space |
| Kim et al. [ | South Korea | 22.6 | 64 F, 56 M | 120 kV, 47.7 mA, FOV 20 × 40 cm | 120/240 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern and chin deviation | ANB angle (skeletal classes I and III), chin deviation | Sagittal | n/a | (1) No statistically significant differences regarding anterior and posterior joint space |
| Akbulut et al. [ | Turkey | 22.07 (adults) | 36 F, 24 M | 120 kV, 20.27 mA, FOV 16 × 6 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I, II, and III molar relationship | Panoramic reconstruction | Centric occlusion in maximal intercuspal position | (1) No differences in condylar position in the glenoid fossa |
| Stasiuk et al. [ | Ukraine | n/a (adolescents and adults) | 36 F, 34 M | n/a | 70/140 | n/a | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I, II, and III molar relationship | Midsagittal | n/a | (1) Optimal condylar position in the glenoid fossa (the 4/7 Gelb's position) was found in 11.43% of cases; regarding Angle's classification: class I group: 17.65%, class II group: 6.67%, class III group: 0% |
| Henriques et al. [ | Brazil | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 20/40 | 1 | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I, II, and III molar relationship | Sagittal and frontal | Centric relation and maximal intercuspal position | (1) No differences regarding centric relation and maximal intercuspal position among all of the groups |
| Merigue et al. [ | Brazil | 16.4 (adolescent and adults) | F and M (detailed distribution n/a) | 120 kV, 36.9 mA, FOV 13 × 23 cm | 49/98 | 1 | (1) By Angle's classification | Class I and II division 1 molar relationship | Sagittal | n/a | (1) No statistically significant difference in condylar position in the glenoid fossa |
| Park et al. [ | South Korea | 25.52 (adults) | 34 F, 26 M | 80 kV, 5 mA, FOV 20 × 17.9 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | SN-GoMe angle | Sagittal | Centric occlusion in maximal intercuspal position | (1) ∗Superior joint space—the highest values in hypodivergent group, the lowest values in hyperdivergent group |
| Ganugapanta et al. [ | India | n/a (adults) | n/a | 60 kV, 30 mA, FOV n/a | 60/120 | n/a | (1) By vertical facial pattern | (vertical facial pattern values n/a), overbite | Sagittal and axial | Maximal intercuspal position | (1) No differences in condylar position between the control group and horizontal growth pattern with the deep bite group |
| Alhammadi et al. [ | Egypt | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 60/120 | 2 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | Mandibular and maxillary plane angle, | Sagittal, axial, and frontal | n/a | (1) ∗Condylar position in long face group: higher values of posterior joint space, the highest medial joint space, lower vertical point and geometric condylar position, more lateral positioned condyles compared to average and short face groups |
Summary of the descriptive characteristics of included articles regarding TMJ articular fossa/eminence; ∗statistically significant; F: female; M: male; n/a: not available; kV: kilo voltage; mA: milliampere; FOV: field of view.
| Reference | Population (country) | Average age (years) | Gender | CBCT acquisitions | Number of patients/joints evaluated | Number of investigators evaluating changes in CBCT | Main group classification | Orthodontic variables assessed | Evaluated articular eminence and glenoid fossa features | Main correlations and conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lin et al. [ | China | 22.46 (adolescents and adults) | 60 F | 120 kV, 5 mA, FOV 17 × 23 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | FH-MP angle, SN-GoGN angle, skeletal pattern, molar class relationship | (1) Depth and width of the glenoid fossa | (1) No differences in width of the glenoid fossa and height of the articular eminence |
| Arieta-Miranda et al. [ | Peru | 25 (adults) | n/a | 90 kV, 8 mA, FOV 20 × 19 cm | 45/90 | 2 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), SGo/NMe relationship | (1) Inclination and height of the articular eminence | (1) Articular eminence inclination: the skeletal class III group showed smaller values than the skeletal class II group |
| Noh et al. [ | South Korea | 23.5 (adults) | 83 F, 48 M | 80 kV, 5.0-8.0 mA, FOV 15.4 × 15.4 cm | 131/262 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | SN-MP, ANB. Angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | (1) Length and height of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗The skeletal class III group showed larger values of glenoid fossa height compared with skeletal class II |
| Chae et al. [ | South Korea | n/a (adolescents) | 64 F, 54 M | 80 kV, 60 mA, FOV 19.97 × 19.97 cm | 120/240 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), SGo/NMe relationship | (1) Inclination of the articular eminence | (1) No differences in inclination of the articular eminence and depth of the glenoid fossa |
| Walewski et al. [ | Brazil | n/a (adults) | 116 F, 97 M | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV n/a | 213/426 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | (1) The presence or absence of articular fossa/eminence surface flattening, erosion, and subcortical sclerosis | (1) In total, 31.5% articular fossae/eminences showed degenerative alterations |
| Lobo et al. [ | Brazil | n/a (adults) | 90 F, 90 M | 120 kV, 38 mA, FOV 17 × 23 cm | 180/360 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | (1) Inclination and height of the articular eminence | (1) ∗Inclination and height of the articular eminence: smaller values in the skeletal class III and I group |
| Song et al. [ | China | 18.11 (adolescents and adults) | 63 F, 60 M | n/a | 123/246 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), FMA angle, APDI, position of the anterior teeth, overbite | (1) Depth and width of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗Wider glenoid fossa in the skeletal class III group compared to the other groups |
| Moscagiuri et al. [ | Italy | 25 (adults) | 28 F, 24 M | 80-110 kV, 5.0-9.0 mA, FOV 19 × 2 cm | 52/104 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III), WITS, A-Pg, | (1) Inclination of the articular eminence | (1) No differences between right and left side of the patient |
| Fan et al. [ | China | 27.91 (adults) | 41 F, 26 M | 110 kV, 5.0 mA, FOV 18 × 16 cm | 67/134 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal class I), molar class relationship (I, II/1, II/2), FH-MP, SN-GnGo (normodivergent) | Height and inclination of the articular eminence | (1) ∗The highest inclination of articular eminence in the class II/2 patient group |
| Khademi et al. [ | Iran | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 64/128 | n/a | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | (1) Angle, depth, and width of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗Wider glenoid fossa in the skeletal class I group compared with the skeletal class III group |
| Gorucu-Coskuner et al. [ | Turkey | 11.4 (adolescents) | 14 F, 14 M | 120 kV, 3.8 mA, FOV 19 × 24 cm | 28/48 | 1 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal class II div 1 and 2, | (1) Depth and width of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗Deeper and wider glenoid fossa in the class II division 1 group compared to the class II division 2 group |
| Alhammadi et al. [ | Egypt | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 60/120 | 2 | (1) By skeletal sagittal pattern | ANB angle (skeletal classes I, II, and III) | (1) Height of the articular eminence, depth, width, and other linear and angular measurements of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗The highest vertical inclination in the class II group compared to the other groups |
| Park et al. [ | South Korea | 25,52 (adults) | 34 F, 26 M | 80 kV, 5 mA, FOV 20 × 17.9 cm | 60/120 | 1 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | SN-GoMe angle | (1) Inclination of the posterior wall of the articular eminence | (1) No differences in inclination of the articular eminence |
| Alhammadi et al. [ | Egypt | n/a (adults) | n/a | n/a | 60/120 | 2 | (1) By vertical facial pattern | Mandibular and maxillary plane angle, | (1) Height of the articular eminence, depth, width and other linear and angular measurements of the glenoid fossa | (1) ∗Highest glenoid fossa width and lowest anterior articular inclination in long face group compared to the other groups |
| Ganugapanta et al. [ | India | n/a (adults) | n/a | 60 kVp, 30 mA FOV n/a | 60/120 | n/a | (1) By vertical facial pattern | (vertical facial pattern values n/a), overbite | (1) Depth and width of the glenoid fossa | (1) No differences in depth of the glenoid fossa according to dental and vertical facial pattern |