Three-dimensional Assessment of Temporomandibular Joint Volume, and Condylar and Glenoid-fossa Morphology: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study

Shivam Mehta; Vaibhav Gandhi; Apexa Patel; Po-Jung Chen; Meng-Hsuan Lin; Chia-Ling Kuo; Aditya Tadinada; Sumit Yadav

doi:10.4103/ccd.ccd_254_23

Three-dimensional Assessment of Temporomandibular Joint Volume, and Condylar and Glenoid-fossa Morphology: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study

Contemp Clin Dent. 2023 Oct-Dec;14(4):256-264. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_254_23. Epub 2023 Dec 19.

Authors

Shivam Mehta¹, Vaibhav Gandhi², Apexa Patel³, Po-Jung Chen⁴, Meng-Hsuan Lin⁵, Chia-Ling Kuo⁶, Aditya Tadinada⁷, Sumit Yadav⁸

Affiliations

¹ Department of Developmental Sciences/Orthodontics, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
² Orthodontist, Symmetry Orthodontics, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
³ Dentist, Dental Dreams, Fall River, Massachusetts, USA.
⁴ Department of Growth and Development, College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
⁵ Department of Adult Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
⁶ Department of Public Health Sciences, Connecticut Convergence Institute for Translation in Regenerative Engineering, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
⁷ Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
⁸ Henry and Anne Cech Professor of Orthodontics, Chair of Department of Growth and Development, College of Dentistry University of Nebraska Medical Center, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.

Abstract

Background: The condylar and glenoid fossa morphology can alter in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD), which can lead to changes in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) space volume. Volumetric evaluation of TMJ can represent the entire three-dimensional (3D)-joint space between the condyle and glenoid fossa.

Aims: To perform 3D assessment of TMJ volume, condylar, and glenoid-fossa morphology using cone-beam computed tomography and evaluate the correlation between these parameters.

Settings and design: Thirty-four patients (age: 13.50 years) who had no previous history of TMD were included.

Materials and methods: The volume of TMJ space was measured and divided into anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral TMJ volume. The antero-posterior (AP) and medio-lateral (ML) condylar width, AP and ML glenoid-fossa width, and glenoid-fossa depth were evaluated.

Statistical analysis used: Statistical analyses were performed with R software at a 0.05 significance level. Each parameter was compared between the left and right sides using a paired-t test. The correlations between the parameters were obtained by the Pearson correlation coefficient.

Results: There was no significant difference between lateral and medial TMJ volume; however, posterior TMJ volume was significantly greater than anterior TMJ volume. A significant correlation was observed between AP glenoid-fossa width and TMJ volume, glenoid-fossa depth and TMJ volume, AP position of the condyle and anterior TMJ volume, ML position of the condyle and medial TMJ volume, glenoid-fossa width and condyle width in AP and ML dimension, glenoid-fossa depth and AP glenoid-fossa width.

Conclusions: In addition to the evaluation of condylar and glenoid-fossa morphology, assessment of TMJ space volume is important for comprehensive evaluation of the joint.

Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; temporomandibular disorders; temporomandibular joint.