Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 248–253 | Cite as

Comparative Histomorphometric Evaluation of Healthy and Ankylosed Mandibular Condylar Process

  • Nandakishore Sahoo
  • Dibyajyoti Boruah
  • Ankur Thakral
  • Rahul Kumar
  • Indranil Deb Roy
Original Article



Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis is one of the most disruptive maladies afflicting the masticatory system. The characteristic feature is the formation of bony mass bridging condyle with glenoid fossa. The exact pathogenesis is, however, not completely understood.


To investigate and compare histomorphometric features of ankylosed condylar specimen with normal condylar process.

Materials and Methods

Group I included 17 post-traumatic unilateral TMJ ankylosis patients managed by excision of ankylosed mass and interpositional arthroplasty. Group II included 13 condylar head fracture patients managed by surgical debridement. The bony specimens of both the groups were subjected to histomorphometric examination for assessment of percentage of bone in trabeculae area (%BONE), osteocyte cell density (OSTCD), the presence of inflammation and fibrosis.


The mean %BONE, OSTCD, %inflammation, %fibrosis was 60.4%, 340.9 mm2, 52.9 and 58.8% in group I and 29.6%, 202.6 mm2, 31 and 0% in group II.  %BONE, OSTCD and fibrosis in cases of TMJ ankylosis were significantly higher than the controls while no significant difference was observed in the presence of inflammation.


The persistence of joint inflammation following condylar head fracture causes aggressive reparative process leading to ankylosis.


Temporomandibular joint Ankylosis Histomorphometry 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures involved in the present study involving human participant were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from the individual included in this study.


  1. 1.
    Wadhwa S, Kapila S (2008) TMJ disorders: future innovations in diagnostics and therapeutics. J Dent Educ 72:930–947PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roychoudhury A, Parkash H, Trikha A (1999) Functional restoration by gap arthroplasty in temporomandibular joint ankylosis: a report of 50 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 87:166–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahoo NK, Tomar K, Kumar A, Roy ID (2012) Selecting reconstruction option for TMJ ankylosis: a surgeon’s dilemma. J Craniofac Surg 23:1796–1801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Miyamoto H, Kurita K, Ogi N, Ishimaru JI, Goss AN (2000) Effect of limited jaw motion on ankylosis of the temporomandibular joint in sheep. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:148–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Laskin DM (1978) Role of the meniscus in the aetiology of post traumatic TM joint ankylosis. Int J Oral Surg 7:340–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miyamoto H, Kurita K, Ogi N, Ishimaru JI, Goss AN (2000) The effect of an intra articular bone fragment in the genesis of temporomandibular joint ankylosis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 29:290–295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    He D, Yang C, Chen M, Zhang X, Qiu Y, Yang X, Li L, Fang B (2011) Traumatic temporomandibular joint ankylosis: our classification and treatment experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:1600–1607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dempster DW, Shane ES (2001) Bone quantification and dynamics of bone turnover by histomorphometric analysis. In: Becker KL (ed) Principles and practice of endocrinology and metabolism, 3rd edn. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 541–548Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Malluche HM, Sherman D, Meyer W, Massry SG (1982) A new semiautomatic method for quantitative static and dynamic bone histology. Calcif Tiss Int 34:439–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boruah D, Moorchung N, Vasudevan B, Malik A, Chatterjee M (2013) Morphometric study of microvessels, epidermal characteristics and inflammation in psoriasis vulgaris with their correlations. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 79:216–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marino A, Becker RO (1970) Piezoelectric effect and growth control in bone. Nature 228:473–474CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bassett CAL (1968) Biologic significance of piezoelectricity. Calc Tiss Res 1:252–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Miyamoto H, Kurita K, Ogi N, Ishimaru JI, Goss AN (1999) The role of the disk in sheep temporomandibular joint ankylosis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 88:151–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferretti C, Bryant R, Becker P, Lawrence C (2005) Temporomandibular joint morphology following post-traumatic ankylosis in 26 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 34:376–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feinberg SE, Larsen PE (1989) The use of a pedicled temporalis muscle-pericranial flap for replacement of TMJ disc: preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 47:142–146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nandakishore Sahoo
    • 1
  • Dibyajyoti Boruah
    • 2
  • Ankur Thakral
    • 3
  • Rahul Kumar
    • 4
  • Indranil Deb Roy
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryCMDC (CC)LucknowIndia
  2. 2.Department of PathologyArmed Forces Medical CollegePuneIndia
  3. 3.Corps Dental UnitBhopalIndia
  4. 4.CMDC (NC)UdhampurIndia
  5. 5.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryArmy Dental Centre (R&R)New DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations