Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disc position in clinically asymptomatic, pretreatment adolescents with Class I, II, or III malocclusion

A retrospective magnetic resonance imaging study

Diskusposition bei klinisch asymptomatischen Jugendlichen vor Behandlung einer Klasse-I-, -II- oder -III-Malokklusion

Eine retrospektive magnetresonanztomographische Studie

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To test the null hypothesis that children with Class I, II, and III malocclusions who have not undergone orthodontic therapy present with displaced discs.

Materials and methods

This study relied on retrospective material consisting of 76 unilateral left sagittal–oblique temporomandibular joint (TMJ) magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs) and lateral cephalometric radiographs taken in maximum intercuspal position in patients with clinically symptom-free and orthodontically untreated Class I (n = 30; 19 girls and 11 boys), Class II (n = 26; 10 girls and 16 boys), and Class III malocclusion (n = 20; 5 girls and 15 boys). The mean ages of patients with Class I, II, and III malocclusions were 10.55 ± 0.81, 11.71 ± 0.31, and 8.98 ± 1.80 years, respectively. Study groups were compared with one-way ANOVA analysis or Welch ANOVA test. Differences were evaluated via the Tukey HSD or Games–Howell test.

Results

Disc–condyle positions were almost within normal limits in Class I malocclusion. The disc was positioned anteriorly relative to the condyle (p < 0.05) and the condyle positioned posteriorly in the glenoid fossa in Class II malocclusion (p < 0.05). The disc was positioned slightly anteriorly relative to the condyle (p < 0.05) and the condyle was positioned posteriorly in the glenoid fossa in Class III malocclusion. Disc–condyle positions were observed to be almost identical in all three malocclusion classes.

Conclusion

Disc–condyle position was nearly normal in patients with Class I malocclusion. Nevertheless, a Class II malocclusion is more apt to reveal anterior disc displacement than a Class III malocclusion.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel

Überprüft werden sollte die Nullhypothese, dass nicht kieferorthopädisch behandelte Kinder mit Klasse-I-, -II- und -III-Malokklusion eine Diskusverlagerung aufweisen.

Material und Methoden

Das in der Studie retrospektiv untersuchte Material bestand aus 76 magnetresonanztomographischen Aufnahmen (MRT; unilateral links, schräg sagittal) des Kiefergelenkes (TMJ) und Fernröntgenseitaufnahmen von klinisch symptomfreien Patienten mit noch nicht kieferorthopädisch behandelter Klasse-I- (n = 30; 19 Mädchen, 11 Jungen), Klasse-II- (n = 26; 10 Mädchen, 16 Jungen) und Klasse-III-Malokklusion (n = 20; 5 Mädchen, 15 Jungen). Das durchschnittliche Lebensalter lag bei 10,55 ± 0,81, 11,71 ± 0,31 und 8,98 ± 1,80 Jahren. Die Gruppen wurden mit der Einwege-ANOVA-Analyse bzw. dem Welch-ANOVA-Test verglichen, Unterschiede wurden mit dem Tukey-HSD- bzw. dem Games-Howell-Test ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse

Die Kondylus-Diskus-Position war bei Klasse-I-Patienten fast im Normbereich. Bei Klassse-II-Malokklusion lag der Diskus relativ zum Kondylus anterior (p < 0,05), und der Kondylus war posterior positioniert in der Fossa glenoidalis (p < 0,05). Bei Klasse-III-Malokklusion befand sich der Diskus leicht anterior in Beziehung zum Kondylus (p < 0,05), und der Kondylus war posterior positioniert in der Fossa glenoidalis. Bei allen 3 Formen der Malokklusion waren fast identische Kondylus-Diskus-Position zu beobachten.

Schlussfolgerung

Die Kondylus-Diskus-Position war bei Klasse-I-Malokklusion nahezu regelrecht; bei Klasse-II-Malokklusion dagegen besteht eine höhere Wahrscheinlichkeit für eine Diskusverschiebung nach vorn als bei Klasse-III-Malokklusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atkinson WB, Bates RE Jr (1983) The effects of the angle of the articular eminence on anterior disk displacement. J Prosthet Dent 49:554–555

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bacetti T, Antonini A, Franchi L, Tonti M, Tollaro I (1997) Glenoid fossa position in different facial types: a cephalometric study. Br J Orthod 24:55–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bell WE (1990) Etiology of temporomandibular disorders. In: Temporomandibular disorder, 3rd edn. Yearbook Medico Publisher, Chicago, pp 104–18

  4. Bery DC, Watkinson AC (1978) Mandibular dysfunction and incisor relation. A theoretical explanation for the clicking joint. Br Dent J 144:74–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Christian H, Hoffmann J, Türp JC (2012) Are temporomandibular disorder symptoms and diag- noses associated with pubertal development in adolescents? An epidemiological study. J Orofac Orthop 73:6–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohlmia JT, Ghosh J, Sinha PK, Nanda RS, Currier GF (1996) Tomographic assessment of temporomandibular joints patients with malocclusion. Angle Orthod 66:27–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dibbets JMH, van der Weele LT (1987) Orthodontic treatment in relation to symptoms attributed to dysfunction of the temporomandibular joint. A 10-year report of the University of Groningen study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 91:193–9

  8. Dibbets JM, van der Weele LT (1991) Flattened condylar projection in children: reflection of seasonal growth? Eur J Orthod 13:161–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Donlon WC, Moon KL (1987) Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, arhtrography and clinical and surgical findings in temporomandibular joint internal derangements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 64:2–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Drace JE, Enzmann DR (1989) Defining the normal temporomandibular joint: closed-, partly open-, and open-mouth MR Imaging of asymptomatic subjects. Radiology 177:67–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Drace JE, Young SW, Enzmann DR (1990) TMJ meniscus and bilaminar zone: MR imaging of the structure—diagnostic landmarks and pitfalls of interpretation. Radiology 177:73–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dubrul EL (1980) The craniomandibular articulation. In: Dubrul EL (ed) Sicher’s oral anatomy, 7th edn. CV Mosby, St Louis, pp 107–16

  13. Egermark I, Magnusson T, Carlsson GE (2003) A 20-year follow-up of signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders and malocclusions in subjects with and without orthodontic treatment in childhood. Angle Orthod 73:109–115

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Farrar WB (1972) Differentiation of temporomandibular joint dysfunction to simplify treatment. J Prosthet Dent 28:629–636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Galhardo AP, da Costa Leite C, Gebrim EM, Gomes RL, Mukai MK, Yamaguchi CA, Bernardo WM, Soares JM Jr, Baracat EC, Gil C (2013) The correlation of research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders and magnetic resonance imaging: a study of diagnostic accuracy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 115:277–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gelb H, Bemstein I (1983) Clinical evaluation of two hundred patients with TMJ syndrome. J Prosthet Dent 49:234–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gökalp H, Türkkahraman H (2000) Changes in position of the temporomandibular joint disc and condyle after disc repositioning appliance therapy: a functional examination and magnetic resonance imaging study. Angle Orthod 70(5):400–408

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gökalp H (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of positional relationship between the disk and condyle in asymptomatic young adult mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod 73:550–555

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gökalp H, Kurt G (2005) Magnetic resonance imaging of the condylar growth pattern and disk position after chin cup therapy: a preliminary study. Angle Orthod 75:568–575

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kantomaa T (1989) The relation between mandibular configuration and the shape of the glenoid fossa in the human. Eur J Orthod 11:77–81

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Katsavrias EG, Halazonetis DJ (2005) Condyle and fossa shape in Class II and Class III skeletal patterns: a morphometric tomographic study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 128:337–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim MR, Graber TM, Viana MA (2002) Orthodontics and temporomandibular disorder: a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 121:438–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Laurell KA, Tootle R, Cunningham R, Beltran J, Simon D (1987) Magnetic resonance imaging of the temporomandibular joint, II: comparison with laminographic, autopsy, and histologic findings. J Prosthet Dent 58:211–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mohlin B, Axelsson S, Paulin G et al (2007) TMD in relation to malocclusion and orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 77:524–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nickel JC, Yao P, Spalding PM et al (2002) Validated numerical modeling of the effects of combined orthodontic and orthognathic surgical treatment of on TMJ loads and muscle forces. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 121:73–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Okeson JP (2008) Management of temporomandibular joint disorders and occlusion. Mosby, St Louis

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pullinger AG, Hollender L, Solberg KW et al (1985) A tomographic study of mandibular condyle position in an asymptomatic population. J Prosthet Dent 53:706–713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pullinger AG, Solberg WK, Hollender L et al (1987) Relationship mandibular condylar position to dental occlusion factors in an asymptomatic population. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 91:200–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ricketts RM (1955) Abnormal function of the temporomandibular joint. Am J Orthod 41:435–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rickets RM (1989) Provocations and perceptions in cranio-facial orthopedics. Dental science and facial art. Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sadowsky C, Polson AM (1984) Temporomandibular disorders and functional occlusion after orthodontic treatment: results of two long-term studies. Am J Orthod 86:386–390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wisth PJ, Tritrapunt A, Rygh P et al (1987) The effect of maxillary protraction on front occlusion and facial morphology. Acta Odontol Scand 45:227–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yatani H, Sonoyama W, Kuboki T et al (1998) The validity of clinical examination for diagnosing anterior disk displacement with reduction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 85:647–653

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Beşevler, 06500, Ankara, Turkey

    Hatice Gökalp

Authors
  1. Hatice Gökalp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hatice Gökalp.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gökalp, H. Disc position in clinically asymptomatic, pretreatment adolescents with Class I, II, or III malocclusion. J Orofac Orthop 77, 194–202 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0024-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0024-6

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation