search for




 

Evaluation of Articular Eminence Morphology in Patients with Spontaneous Temporomandibular Joint Dislocation Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
J Oral Med Pain 2022;47:27-37
Published online March 30, 2022;  https://doi.org/10.14476/jomp.2022.47.1.27
© 2022 Korean Academy of Orofacial Pain and Oral Medicine

Ji Hoo Kim1,2, Hyun-Jeong Park2, Yo-Seob Seo3, Ji-Won Ryu2, Jong-Mo Ahn2

1Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
2Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
3Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
Correspondence to: Jong-Mo Ahn
Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, 309 Pilmundaero, Dong-gu, Gwangju 61452, Korea
Tel: +82-62-220-3896
Fax: +82-62-234-2119
E-mail: jmahn@chosun.ac.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3615-3688

This study was supported by research fund from Chosun University Dental Hospital 2021.
Received February 3, 2022; Revised March 2, 2022; Accepted March 2, 2022.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to broaden our understanding of the predisposing factor and treatment of dislocation by analyzing and evaluating the morphology of the articular eminence (AE) in subjects with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dislocation using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Methods: The subjects were divided into two groups: dislocation (31 subjects) and control (32 subjects). CBCT was used to examine 126 TMJs in 63 subjects (26 males, 37 females). The height, width, and posterior slope of the AE were measured in the parasagittal plane. The posterior slope was measured using the “top-roof line angle (TR angle)” method and the “best-fit line angle (BF angle)” method. The AE on the left side (AEL) and the AE on the right side (AER) of the subjects in the dislocation group were separately analyzed and compared with the control group after taking measurements. The average value of both sides was used when comparing with subjects with bilateral dislocation.
Results: Dislocations were more frequent in females (67.7%) than in males (32.3%). The dislocation group showed a gentler TR angle than the control group in the AER and in the average of AE on the both sides (AEB). The same group also showed a wider AE in the AEL and the AER (p<0.05). In subjects with unilateral dislocation, the width of the AE with dislocation was narrower and the TR angle and BF angle was steeper than the other side without dislocation (p<0.05).
Conclusions: In subjects with unilateral TMJ dislocation, the posterior slope of the AE is steeper, and the width is narrower at the site of dislocation compared to the site without dislocation. However, in subjects with bilateral TMJ dislocation, AEB were wider, and the mean value of the posterior slope of AEB was gentler than that of the control group.
Keywords : Articular eminence; Cone-beam computed tomography; Dislocation
INTRODUCTION

The mandibular condyle articulates with the squamous portion of the temporal bone at the base of the skull. Anterior to the mandibular fossa is a convex osseous prominence called articular eminence (AE). The degree of convexity of AE varies widely, however the slope of this surface is critical as it determines the path of the mandibular condyle and the degree of rotation of the articular disc to the condyle when the mandible moves forward [1,2].

A dislocation occurs in a joint prone to subluxation, but subluxation is an anatomical feature of a joint and is not pathological. Subluxation is most common in AEs with a short, steep posterior slope and a long, flat anterior slope. The anterior slope is often higher than the apex of the AE. Occasionally, the mandibular condyle slides anteriorly to the AE beyond the maximal opening limitation and cannot return to the rest position (closed position), and this is called a spontaneous dislocation or open lock [1]. Dislocations can be further categorized into partial (subluxation) or complete (dislocation), bilateral or unilateral, and chronic (or acute) persistent or chronic recurrent [3]. Dislocations can occur in several directions, the most common of which is anterior dislocation. Anterior dislocations usually occur after the normal sequence of muscle activity when the mouth is open wide and then closed [3,4]. Other types of dislocations such as medial, lateral, posterior, and superior (when the condyle goes up into the middle cranial fossa) are rare and are mostly associated with trauma [3-5].

The most common clinical symptoms of dislocation are drooling and difficulty in speaking, moving the lips, and closing the mouth. Acute dislocation is usually painful in the preauricular area, but such pain is rarely found in chronic recurrent dislocation. In a unilateral dislocation, the mandible may be deflected to the opposite side, and a depression of the preauricular area can be observed with an empty feeling upon palpation on the joint space. The patient may also appear anxious [1,6]. Treatment is usually manual reduction method in case of acute dislocation. And in the case of chronic recurrent dislocation, conservative methods (e.g., injecting the various sclerosing agents like alcohol, sodium tetradecyl sulfate, platelet-rich plasma into the joint space, intermaxillary fixation [IMF], injecting the botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) in the lateral pterygoid muscle, etc.) can be tried first, and if the results are not satisfactory, surgical methods (e.g., condylotomy, eminectomy, etc.) can be considered [3].

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dislocation is due to an imbalance of neuromuscular function or structural defects. Changes in neuromuscular function are caused by relaxation of the articular disk and capsule ligaments, long-lasting internal derangement, and spasm of the lateral pterygoid muscle. Structural defects are accompanied by arthritic changes in TMJ, which include flattening of the mandibular condyle, narrowing of the joint space, and shortening of AE. Morphological changes of the mandibular fossa, zygomatic arch, and squamotympanic fissure may also take place. [3,5,7]. Changes in age and dentition also play an important role in dislocation [3,4,7,8]. Other causes include hyperfunction of TMJ, which may happen while opening the mouth wide during yawning, laughing, vomiting, and receiving treatments such as extraction of the third molar, endotracheal intubation, and endoscopy [3,5]. Genetic defects in collagen synthesis, such as orofacial dystonia, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and Marfan syndrome, are also considered causative [3,6].

Chronic recurrent dislocation, which is often found with the habit of opening the mouth wide, is usually spontaneous and self-limiting depending on the morphology of the TMJ and the degree of change in adjacent structures. Dislocations are common in patients with features such as high AE, hypoplastic AE, narrow mandibular fossa, flaccid joint capsule, collagen disorders, small mandibular condyle, hypermobility syndrome, oromandibular dystonia, and neuroleptic drug use [4]. Chronic and repeated dislocation may stretch the ligaments and potentially induce some degree of disc displacement [1,9]. Dislocation is also usually associated with a posterior slope of the AE at the position of the maximal opening [6].

However, not all patients with dislocation possess a steep AE slope. There have been many studies on the treatment of dislocation [7,8,10] or the relationship between the morphology of AE and disc displacement [11-20], but almost no studies have been found on the relationship between the morphology of AE and dislocation except for the study of Cohen et al. [21]. In their study [21], the morphology of AE did not affect the anterior dislocation of the TMJ. Therefore, this study aimed to broaden our understanding of the predisposing factor and treatment of dislocation by analyzing and evaluating the AE morphology of the TMJ in subjects with and without dislocation using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. Study Subjects

The data were collected from the medical records of patients that visited Chosun University Dental Hospital in Gwangju, Korea, between February 1, 2012, and August 31, 2021. The subjects of the study were 31 patients, who were diagnosed with dislocation and whose CBCT images were available. There were 10 males and 21 females, ranging from 14 to 83 years (Table 1).


To compare with the dislocation group, 32 patients (16 males, 16 females, ages 15 to 86) with available CBCT images and no history of dislocation were chosen at random for a control group. Patients with a history of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) with opening limitation or pain, osteoarthritis of the TMJ on radiographic imaging, orthodontic treatment, craniofacial abnormalities, fractures of the oral and maxillofacial region, and any systemic diseases that could cause dental or skeletal changes were excluded from the control group (Table 1).

In this study, a total of 126 joints were investigated from the 63 patients (26 males, 37 females). The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Chosun University Dental Hospital (approval no. CUDHIRB-2103-001) as a research exempt from the consents of the subjects.

2. Study Methods

The CBCT machines used for the three-dimensional (3D) imaging of the TMJ were CB Mercuray (Hitachi Corp., Tokyo, Japan), Viso G7 (Planmeca Corp., Helsinki, Finland), and CS9300 3D (Carestream Health Inc., Rochester, NY, USA). The following exposure parameters were used: 85–120 kV tube potential, 4 to 10 mA tube current, and 0.2 to 0.3-mm voxel size.

OnDemand3D (Cybermed Co., Seoul, Korea) was used as the software for analyzing CT images of the TMJ area as it allows section, rotation, and reconstruction of 3D images. Images were reconstructed based on each subject’s individual angle of AE. To make a measurement slice, the Frankfort horizontal plane (FH plane) was selected as a horizontal reference plane, and the image was rotated so that the FH plane and the axial plane aligned (Fig. 1). Paracoronal images were then reconstructed parallel to the line connecting the outermost and innermost points of the mandibular fossa in the axial plane. Considering the widest part of the oval-shaped mandibular fossa, the outermost point was set at the posterior edge of the lateral part of the AE in the axial plane, and the innermost point was set at the point where the sphenoidal spine of the sphenoid bone and the petrotympanic fissure meet in the axial plane. Parasagittal images were reconstructed in a plane perpendicular to the center of the mandibular fossa in the paracoronal plane. The height, the width, and the posterior slope of the AE were then measured in this parasagittal image (Fig. 2).


The height of the articular eminence (EH) was measured as the vertical distance from the deepest point of the mandibular fossa to the line passing through the horizontal reference plane and the lowest point of the AE [15,16,22,23]. The width of the articular eminence (EW) was measured as the horizontal distance from the lowest point of the AE to the line descending vertically from the deepest point of the mandibular fossa, which should be parallel to the FH plane [22]. The inclination of the AE is the angle formed by the posterior part of the AE and the horizontal reference plane, and this angle was measured by two methods. The first method was to use the “top-roof line angle (TR angle)”, which is the angle between the horizontal reference plane and the line connecting the lowest point of the AE and the deepest point of the mandibular fossa. The second was to use the “best-fit line angle (BF angle)”, which is the angle between the horizontal reference plane and the tangent line drawn at the posterior slope of the AE (Fig. 3). The length was measured with a precision of 1/10 mm, and the slope was measured with a precision of 1/10 degree. All measurements were taken three times by a single observer, and the average of the measurements was used for statistical analyses. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to verify intra-observer reproducibility.


In this study, the AE on the left side (AEL) and AE on the right side (AER) of the subjects with dislocation were separately considered and compared with the control group. At this time, when comparing the AEL of the dislocation group with the control group, the total average value of the AEL of the left unilateral dislocation subjects and bilateral dislocation subjects were used. Also, when comparing the AER of the dislocation group with the control group, the total average value of the AER of the right unilateral dislocation subjects and bilateral dislocation subjects were used. When comparing AE on the both sides (AEB) of the dislocation group with the control group, the average value of both sides was used. Additionally, AEs were also analyzed according to sex and age. When comparing AE according to sex in the dislocation group, the average value of AEB was used including the area where dislocation did not occur. In addition, when analyzing the relationship of AE according to age, groups were divided into age groups with 10 years interval, with the exception of 70s and 80s group, which were merged together as there was no subjects in 70s. AEB of the subjects with unilateral dislocation were compared to one another, AEs of the subjects with bilateral dislocation, and AEs of the control group.

3. Statistical Analysis

IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used to perform statistical analysis. All quantitative variables were expressed as mean±standard deviation. The normality of the distribution was confirmed by the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, and the homogeneity of the variance was confirmed by the Levene test. An independent t-test was used for group comparison, and Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the relationship between groups. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The height, the width, and the posterior inclination of the AE measured three times in repetition by the observer showed remarkable reproducibility (ICC>0.9) (Table 2).


1. Proportion and the Average Age of Males and Females in the Dislocation and Control Groups

The dislocation group consisted of 10 male and 21 female subjects, and it was found that dislocation was more frequent in females (67.7%) than males (32.3%). Their ages ranged from 14 to 83 years old, and the average age was 34.9±18.5 years, with males having an average age of 26.6±9.8 years and females having 38.9±20.3 years. The control group consisted of 16 male and 16 female subjects, and their ages ranged from 15 to 86 years old. The average age was 42.6±20.3 years, with 42.8±20.6 years for males and 42.4±19.9 years for females (Table 1).

2. Morphology of Articular Eminence in the Dislocation and Control Groups

Compared with the control group, the dislocation group had a wider width in the AEL and AER (p<0.05), and the TR angle was gentler in the AER and in the average of AEB (p<0.05; Table 3).


3. Morphology of Articular Eminence in the Dislocation and Control Groups According to Sex

In the dislocation group, the height of AE was higher in males than in females with a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). In the control group, the height of AE was higher in males than in females, and the TR angle and BF angle was steeper with a statistically significant difference (p<0.05; Table 4).


4. Morphology of Articular Eminence in the Dislocation and Control Groups According to Age

Dislocations were most frequent in the 20s (38.7%), and the width of AEL and the average of AEB decreased with age in dislocation group (p<0.05). In the control group, there was no statistically significant difference in height, width, and posterior slope of the AEL, AER and the average of AEB according to age (p>0.05; Table 5).


5. Morphology of Articular Eminence at the Dislocated Side and the Unaffected Side in Patients with Unilateral Dislocation

When comparing AEB in subjects with unilateral dislocation, the width of the AE was narrower, and the TR angle and BF angle was steeper at the site of dislocation (p<0.05; Table 6).


6. Morphology of Articular Eminence in Patients with Bilateral Dislocation and in the Control Group

In subjects with bilateral dislocation, the AEL and the AER were wider, and the TR angle of the average of AEB was gentler compared to the control group (p<0.05; Table 7).

DISCUSSION

The highly convex anteroposterior morphology and slightly concave mediolateral morphology of the AE lead to a change in inclination [2]. The normal value of the posterior inclination of the AE in adults is 30 to 60 degrees [2]. The AE determines the path and type of the condylar disc complex movement as a part of the temporal fossa where the condyle-disc complex slides during various mandibular functional movements [2,16,24]. Changes in the slope of the AE can lead to biomechanical changes in the TMJ because the characteristics of the TMJ determine the trajectory of functional movement [24]. Naturally, the slope of the AE and the morphology of the mandibular fossa may be predisposing factors for TMD [2,12,15,22]. Therefore, the morphology of AE was analyzed in this study to broaden the understanding of the predisposing factors and treatments of TMD, including dislocation.

While only a few studies on the morphology of the AE in subjects with dislocation could be found, there were numerous studies of the AE in subjects with internal derangement, most of which suggest that the steep inclination of AE is one cause of internal derangement [1,12,13,16]. In the study of Kerstens et al. [10], most patients who underwent articular eminectomy showed significantly better symptoms of internal derangement after the surgery, which suggests that flatter AE may be more advantageous. Alternatively, Ren et al. [11] and Sümbüllü et al. [25] could not test the hypothesis that steep AE is one of the factors of internal derangement. Instead, they found that the inclination of the AE was steeper in asymptomatic volunteers with normal disc positions than in patients with disc displacement. In addition, in the study of Panmekiate et al. [14], no correlation was found between steep AE and anterior displacement of the articular disc. The posterior slope of AE of the joint with disc displacement without reduction was normal, but the slope was nevertheless significantly lower than that of disc displacement with reduction. As the ideal steepness for healthy TMJ is not yet known, conclusions about the association between steep AE and internal derangement are still uncertain [11]. In this study, the dislocation group had a wider width of AEB (p<0.05), and the posterior slope (TR angle) of the AER and the average of AEB were gentler (p<0.05) compared to the control group (Table 3). These results may mean that the greater the distance the mandibular condyle moves at the time of maximum opening, the higher the possibility of dislocation. Further research is needed to confirm whether there is any discord during the maximum opening with the masticatory muscle, its related ligaments, and neuromuscular control including nerve transmission by the mandibular branch of the trigeminal nerve.

In this study, TMJ dislocation occurred more frequently in females (21 subjects, 67.7%) than in males (10 subjects, 32.3%). However, in the study of Ugboko et al. [26], TMJ dislocation had a higher chance to occur in males than in females, although the difference was not statistically significant. In addition, Ugboko et al. [26] reported that the average age of patients with dislocation was 35.3±17.4 years (ranging from 9 to 85 years old of age), which was in accordance with the result found in this study, 34.9±18.5 years (ranging from 14 to 83 years old of age) (Table 1).

Some studies have reported a notable difference in the inclination or height of the AE according to sex [16,27]. Sümbüllü et al. [25] reported that in both the TMD group and the control group, the slope and height of AE were higher in males than in females, but there was no significant difference. Paknahad et al. [16] also found that the height of the AE in males was higher than in females, which was significant in the control group but not in the TMD group. This study showed that, in the dislocation group, the males had a higher AE slope, height, and width than females, but only the height of the AE showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). In the control group, the slope and the height of the AE of males were significantly higher than those of females (p<0.05), and the width of the AE was wider in females but without statistically significant difference (p>0.05; Table 4). In both the dislocation group and the control group, males had a significantly higher AE than females, but it is not clear whether this difference originates from the innate skeletal difference between sexs or difference in the morphology of AE in males and females that affects dislocation.

Several studies [11,16,22,28] reported no statistically significant difference in the inclination of the AE with increasing age. On the other hand, Choi et al. [23] reported that the height and inclination the AE would reach its highest sometime between the ages of 21 and 30 but begin to decrease after the age of 30. The results of this study show that the width of the AEL and the average of AEB decreased with age in subjects with dislocation (p<0.05). However, in the control group, there was no statistically significant difference in the height, the width, and the posterior slope of the AE according to age (p>0.05). The frequency of dislocation was also high in the 20s (38.7%), as seen in the study of Ugboko et al. [26] (Table 5). Further research is needed to elucidate precisely at what age during the 20s that the frequency of dislocation is highest and whether it is related to the period of the growth completion of the TMJ. In addition, it is necessary to study the change in the morphology of the AE with increasing age with a larger sample.

Because there is no AE at birth and the mandible moves only forward or sideways but not downward during the first few months of life, the AE is thought to develop almost exclusively after birth [2]. Several studies [2,15] have suggested that the developmental stage of the dentition may also affect the slope of the AE. The slope of AE changes rapidly until the deciduous teeth are completed, reaching 45% of the adults by 2 years of age, and reaching 71% by 10 years of age [2,15]. According to Humphreys’ study [29], the mandibular fossa is shallow and lacks AE until the age of 6. However, it begins to expand slowly until the age of 10 when it receives a sudden growth stimulus and nearly completes its development by the age of 12. On the other hand, studies by Katsavrias [2] and Paknahad et al. [16] find that the inclination of AE reaches 92% at the age of 20. Additionally, Hinton [30] reports that the TMJ undergoes continuous morphological changes, and these changes appear to be mediated by dental occlusion. The precise time for the complete development of the AE is still controversial [15].

The results showed that, in the dislocated site, the width of the AE was narrower, and the posterior slope (TR angle and BF angle) was steeper than that of the non-dislocated site in the subjects with unilateral dislocation (p<0.05; Table 6). In subjects with bilateral dislocation, AEB were wider (p<0.05), and the average of AEB had a gentler posterior slope (TR angle) than in the control group (p<0.05; Table 7). According to the study of Katsavrias [2], there is no statistically significant difference between the development of the AEL and the AER because the slope of the AE has a symmetrical growth pattern under normal conditions. In some studies [31,32], when measuring the slope of the AE in Asian populations, it was found that the measured values of the AEL and the AER were not significantly different. In the study of Paknahad et al. [16], there was no statistically significant difference in the slope, height, and width of the AEL and the AER in both the control group and the TMD patient group. It could not be concluded from the results of this study whether the difference in the morphology of the AE in unilateral dislocation was a cause or a result. In addition, the influence of muscles or ligaments around the TMJ may be greater than anatomical factors in inducing unilateral and bilateral dislocations. Further studies are therefore needed to elucidate how much bone remodeling from adaptation over time or from recurrent dislocation as an anatomical predisposing factor and how much the muscles or ligaments around the TMJ affect dislocation.

Several methods can be used to measure the inclination of the AE. These methods include indirect measurements using cranial impression taking, panoramic radiographs, cephalometric radiographs, arthrography, and tomography [2]. Selection of the appropriate method to measure the slope or the morphology of the AE is critical because it can affect the outcome [2,15]. Cranial impression taking involves modeling with clay and wax, which is susceptible to warping and shrinkage [2]. Inspecting the path of the anterior condyle is an indirect method to measure the inclination of the AE. However, the tracking of the condylar path compares only the inclination of AE measured on lateral cephalometric radiographs. Therefore, it is questionable whether it can accurately represent the anatomical characteristics of the posterior inclination of AE [11]. The joints are distorted in the panoramic radiographs, making their morphology difficult to interpret with good accuracy and stability [13]. There were limitations in using tomography or arthrography to diagnose the morphology of the TMJ [31]. They were later replaced by spiral CT, which evaluates skeletal components in 3D without overlap or distortion. Nowadays, CBCT is used over spiral CT because of reduced radiation dose, improved spatial resolution, shorter scan time, and better cost-effectiveness [33]. CBCT is the preferred method to evaluate the skeletal structure in the oral region, with high dimensional accuracy in measuring maxillofacial structures including the TMJ [16,25]. In this study as well, CBCT was used to evaluate and analyze the morphology of the TMJ, especially the AE.

The slope of the AE is the angle formed by one of the lines passing through the horizontal reference plane and the AE. A horizontal reference plane is another critical factor influencing the slope of the AE, which directly determines the degree of angle. This can be the FH plane, the palatal plane, the occlusal plane, the anterior nasal spine-posterior nasal spine (ANS-PNS), or other defined reference planes. A study by Fan et al. [15] describes the FH plane, which is a line drawn from the lowest point of the inferior orbital margin (Or) to the highest point of the contour of the ear canal (Po), as an important and a commonly known reference plane. Using a stable and comparable horizontal reference plane is critical, and the FH plane seems to be a relatively ideal reference plane for evaluating the slope of the AE because the landmarks of the FH plane are independent of the TMJ structure and are not affected by changes in the mandibular fossa and the AE [15]. Therefore, with the FH plane being the horizontal reference plane, the images were rotated in this study to make sure that the reference plane and the axial plane aligned (Fig. 1).

In each of the three planes of CBCT, the most suitable image had to be selected for measuring the morphology of AE. In most studies [16,22,34], the central sagittal slice of the mandibular condyle was selected because it showed the steepest part of the AE that best represents the slice. On the other hand, the purpose of this study was to observe the morphology of the AE or mandibular fossa and not the mandibular condyle, and whether the mandibular condyle always shows the steepest part of the AE was questionable. Therefore, the parasagittal image was reconstructed using the widest part of the mandibular fossa as the center (Fig. 2).

The TR method and the BF method have been used in many previous studies as the two main methods for evaluating the slope of the AE [2,15,16,22,23]. The TR angle method relates to the height of the AE, which focuses on the position of the AE to the mandibular fossa and better describes the morphology of the AE. The BF angle method directly relates to the direction of movement of the condyle-disc complex and reflects the actual condyle path (Fig. 3) [2,15,16].

Since the number of dislocation patients in this study is small, it is rather unreasonable to establish a causal relationship between dislocation and the morphology of AE solely from the results of this study. It was difficult to match sex and age equally between the control group and the experimental group, and additional studies with larger sample sizes are needed in the future.

In subjects with unilateral TMJ dislocation, the posterior slope of the AE is steeper, and the width is narrower at the site of dislocation compared to the site without dislocation. However, in subjects with bilateral TMJ dislocation, AEB are wider, and the mean value of the posterior slope of AEB is gentler than that of the control group. The morphological predisposing factors of TMDs including dislocation have been confirmed in this study as described, and such knowledge can be clinically applied in diagnosing and performing treatments such as manual manipulation while considering anatomical factors of AE.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures
Fig. 1. The image rotated to coincide with the Frankfort horizontal plane and the axial plane.
Fig. 2. Axial imaging reconstruction.
Fig. 3. Measurements for the morphology of the articular eminence. (A) EH (eminence height), the distance between point f’ and f. EW (eminence width), the distance between points f and e. (B) TR (top-roof line angle), the angle formed by a straight line passing through the point f’ and point e with the Frankfort horizontal (FH) plane. (C) BF (best-fit line angle), the angle between the tangent to the posterior inclination of the articular eminence and the FH plane. f’, highest point of the mandibular fossa; e, lowest point of the articular eminence; f, point that meets when descending vertically from the deepest point of the mandibular fossa in the FH plane passing through the lowest point of the articular eminence; F, FH plane; F’, parallel line to the FH plane, passing point f’.
Tables

Demographic characteristics of the subjects.

Characteristic Group

Dislocation (n=31) Control (n=32)
Sex
Male 10 (32.3) 16 (50.0)
Female 21 (67.7) 16 (50.0)
Total 31 32
Dislocated side
Unilateral 25 (80.6) -
Bilateral 6 (19.4) -
Total 31 -
Age (y)
Male 26.6±9.8 42.8±20.6
Female 38.9±20.3 42.4±19.9
Total 34.9±18.5 42.6±20.3

Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation.

Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)

Variable ICC

Dislocation group (n=31) Control group (n=32)
Eminence height (mm)
AEL 0.986 0.980
AER 0.991 0.983
Eminence width (mm)
AEL 0.987 0.976
AER 0.971 0.985
Top-roof line angle (°)
AEL 0.994 0.990
AER 0.992 0.993
Best-fit line angle (°)
AEL 0.998 0.997
AER 0.997 0.998

AEL, articular eminence on the left side; AER, articular eminence on the right side.

Morphology of articular eminence in temporomandibular joint dislocation group and control group

Variable AEL AER AEB



E (n=23)a C (n=32) E (n=14)b C (n=32) E (n=6) C (n=32)
Eminence height (mm) 8.0±1.7 7.7±1.3 7.9±1.7 7.8±1.3 8.6±1.7 7.7±1.1
p-value 0.430 0.816 0.167
Eminence width (mm) 9.3±2.3 8.1±1.5 10.3±2.0 8.3±1.9 11.1±1.9 8.2±1.4
p-value 0.018* 0.002* 0.000*
Top-roof line angle (°) 41.4±9.1 44.1±6.5 37.6±6.3 43.5±7.1 38.2±6.7 43.8±5.7
p-value 0.205 0.011* 0.044*
Best-fit line angle (°) 60.6±15.2 57.9±9.9 48.9±10.3 55.9±11.0 54.1±8.5 56.9±8.8
p-value 0.416 0.051 0.486

E, experimental group; C, control group; AEL, articular eminence on the left side; AER, articular eminence on the right side; AEB, articular eminence on the both sides.

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.

aAEL of left unilateral dislocation subjects+AEL of bilateral dislocation subjects.

bAER of right unilateral dislocation subjects+AER of bilateral dislocation subjects.

p-values were obtained by the independent t-test. *p<0.05.

Morphology of articular eminence according to sex in each temporomandibular joint dislocation group and control group

Variable Dislocation group (n=31) Control group (n=32)


Male (n=10) Female (n=21) p-value Male (n=16) Female (n=16) p-value
Eminence height (mm) 8.6±1.5 7.3±1.3 0.017* 8.3±1.0 7.2±1.1 0.005*
Eminence width (mm) 10.4±2.0 10.1±1.8 0.651 7.9±1.1 8.4±1.6 0.055
Top-roof line angle (°) 40.5±7.1 36.3±6.9 0.132 46.4±5.5 41.1±4.9 0.007*
Best-fit line angle (°) 54.3±12.8 50.8±11.8 0.457 61.8±7.5 51.9±7.4 0.001*

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation. Values are the average of articular eminence on the both sides, including areas where dislocation did not occur.

p-values were obtained by the independent t-test. *p<0.05.

Morphology of articular eminence according to age in the temporomandibular joint dislocation group and control group

Variable Group 10-19 y 20-29 y 30-39 y 40-49 y 50-59 y 60-69 y 70-89 ya Pearson correlation coefficient p-value
N (%) E (n=31) 5 (16.1) 12 (38.7) 4 (12.9) 1 (3.2) 4 (12.9) 4 (12.9) 1 (3.2) - -
C (n=32) 4 (12.5) 8 (25.0) 4 (12.5) 4 (12.5) 4 (12.5) 4 (12.5) 4 (12.5)
Eminence height (mm)
Left AE E 7.7±0.3 7.4±1.5 8.6±1.8 9.6±0.0 7.4±2.1 7.4±1.2 6.8±0.0 –0.057 0.760
C 8.7±0.9 7.9±1.0 7.3±1.2 6.7±1.9 7.1±1.2 8.0±1.0 8.0±1.1 –0.121 0.511
Right AE E 7.7±1.7 8.1±1.4 8.6±0.9 9.2±0.0 6.7±1.8 7.1±1.9 6.2±0.0 –0.269 0.144
C 8.6±0.7 7.9±1.4 7.7±1.1 7.6±1.2 8.2±1.7 6.3±0.6 8.0±0.6 –0.222 0.221
Both AE E 7.7±0.9 7.8±1.4 8.6±1.2 9.4±0.0 7.1±2.0 7.3±1.6 6.5±0.0 –0.177 0.340
C 8.6±0.8 7.9±1.1 7.5±1.0 7.2±1.3 7.7±1.3 7.2±0.6 8.0±0.9 –0.197 0.280
Eminence width (mm)
Left AE E 13.4±3.3 10.2±2.0 10.0±2.2 6.3±0.0 8.2±0.9 8.5±1.2 10.2±0.0 –0.461* 0.009*
C 8.9±1.8 8.0±1.0 7.7±1.8 7.9±1.3 7.1±1.5 8.8±1.5 8.4±0.8 0.006 0.973
Right AE E 11.5±1.4 9.9±1.8 10.2±1.3 11.6±0.0 10.3±1.5 9.5±1.3 10.3±0.0 –0.164 0.378
C 9.7±2.4 9.0±1.1 8.8±1.6 7.6±0.8 6.6±1.1 6.5±1.2 9.0±1.6 –0.341 0.056
Both AE E 12.4±2.1 10.1±1.5 10.1±1.5 9.0±0.0 9.2±1.1 9.0±1.1 10.2±0.0 –0.413* 0.021*
C 9.3±1.7 8.5±0.8 8.2±1.6 7.8±1.1 6.9±1.2 7.6±1.2 8.7±0.7 –0.225 0.215
Top-roof line angle (°)
Left AE E 31.6±6.2 36.9±8.6 41.5±9.8 55.7±0.0 41.7±11.4 41.5±6.4 33.4±0.0 0.255 0.166
C 45.2±8.9 45.4±3.6 43.9±10.0 40.6±5.8 45.4±2.8 43.1±5.2 43.8±5.6 –0.109 0.552
Right AE E 33.5±3.4 39.2±6.1 40.3±3.4 38.3±0.0 33.5±9.7 36.3±7.1 31.5±0.0 –0.139 0.455
C 42.6±8.8 40.5±7.2 41.5±7.3 44.9±4.5 50.4±3.5 44.8±5.7 42.4±4.4 0.180 0.324
Both AE E 32.5±3.5 38.0±6.1 40.9±5.2 47.0±0.0 37.6±10.5 38.9±6.4 32.5±0.0 0.109 0.560
C 43.9±7.6 43.0±4.8 42.7±8.4 42.8±4.8 47.9±3.2 44.0±3.9 43.1±3.9 0.050 0.785
Best-fit line angle (°)
Left AE E 59.0±10.1 49.6±14.8 58.1±18.1 85.1±0.0 54.8±18.3 59.0±14.5 44.7±0.0 0.054 0.774
C 60.4±11.1 55.5±6.6 58.0±5.6 55.4±14.6 58.2±5.6 61.1±13.9 58.7±6.7 0.061 0.741
Right AE E 46.9±10.6 49.5±11.7 58.1±2.9 45.1±0.0 42.1±18.5 47.5±9.7 46.5±0.0 –0.105 0.574
C 60.5±14.9 48.3±9.0 55.3±12.4 65.0±4.3 60.3±5.1 54.8±10.0 54.5±3.9 0.079 0.668
Both AE E 52.9±9.0 49.6±10.8 58.1±8.7 65.1±0.0 48.5±17.6 53.3±10.8 45.6±0.0 –0.017 0.928
C 60.4±12.6 51.9±6.0 56.6±8.7 60.2±6.9 59.2±4.3 58.0±11.7 56.6±5.1 0.082 0.654

E, experimental group; C, control group; AE, articular emience.

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.

aIn the dislocation group, there were no 70s, so the 70s and 80s were combined.

p-values were obtained by the Pearson correlation analysis. *p<0.05.

Morphology of articular eminence at the dislocation and non-dsi location sites in the unilateral dislocation group

Variable Dislocation site (n=25) Non-dislocation site (n=25) p-value
Eminence height (mm) 7.7±1.5 7.3±1.5 0.370
Eminence width (mm) 9.1±1.9 10.9±2.2 0.002*
Top-roof line angle (°) 40.8±8.7 34.3±7.4 0.006*
Best-fit line angle (°) 57.2±15.8 45.6±13.0 0.007*

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.

p-values were obtained by the independent t-test. *p<0.05.

Morphology of articular eminence in bilateral dislocation group and control group

AEL AER AEB



E (n=6) C (n=32) E (n=6) C (n=32) E (n=6) C (n=32)
Eminence height (mm) 8.7±1.8 7.7±1.3 8.4±2.2 7.8±1.3 8.6±1.7 7.7±1.1
p-value 0.145 0.312 0.167
Eminence width (mm) 11.4±2.6 8.1±1.5 10.7±1.9 8.3±1.9 11.1±1.9 8.2±1.4
p-value 0.000* 0.006* 0.000*
Top-roof line angle (°) 38.4±8.2 44.1±6.5 38.0±6.9 43.5±7.1 38.2±6.7 43.8±5.7
p-value 0.063 0.095 0.044*
Best-fit line angle (°) 57.9±10.8 57.9±9.9 50.2±13.0 55.9±11.0 54.1±8.5 56.9±8.8
p-value 0.991 0.268 0.486

AEL, articular eminence on the left side; AER, articular eminence on the right side; AEB, articular eminence on the both sides; E, experimental group; C, control group.

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.

p-values were obtained by the independent t-test. *p<0.05.

References
  1. Okeson JP. Management of temporomandibular disorders and occlusion. 7th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier/Mosby; 2014. p. 4-6, 165-166.
  2. Katsavrias EG. Changes in articular eminence inclination during the craniofacial growth period. Angle Orthod 2002;72:258-264.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Sharma NK, Singh AK, Pandey A, Verma V, Singh S. Temporomandibular joint dislocation. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2015;6:16-20.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  4. Akinbami BO. Evaluation of the mechanism and principles of management of temporomandibular joint dislocation. Systematic review of literature and a proposed new classification of temporomandibular joint dislocation. Head Face Med 2011;7:10.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  5. Güven O. Inappropriate treatments in temporomandibular joint chronic recurrent dislocation: a literature review presenting three particular cases. J Craniofac Surg 2005;16:449-452.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Shakya S, Ongole R, Sumanth KN, Denny CE. Chronic bilateral dislocation of temporomandibular joint. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ) 2010;8:251-256.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Vasconcelos BC, Porto GG, Neto JP, Vasconcelos CF. Treatment of chronic mandibular dislocations by eminectomy: follow-up of 10 cases and literature review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2009;14:e593-e596.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Medra AM, Mahrous AM. Glenotemporal osteotomy and bone grafting in the management of chronic recurrent dislocation and hypermobility of the temporomandibular joint. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;46:119-122.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  9. Korean Academy of Orofacial Pain and Oral Medicine. Orofacial pain and temporomandibular disorders. Seoul: Dental Wisdom; 2012. p. 150.
    CrossRef
  10. Kerstens HC, Tuinzing DB, van der Kwast WA. Eminectomy and discoplasty for correction of the displaced temporomandibular joint disc. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47:150-154.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  11. Ren YF, Isberg A, Westesson PL. Steepness of the articular eminence in the temporomandibular joint. Tomographic comparison between asymptomatic volunteers with normal disk position and patients with disk displacement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;80:258-266.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  12. Hall MB, Gibbs CC, Sclar AG. Association between the prominence of the articular eminence and displaced TMJ disks. Cranio 1985;3:237-239.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  13. Kerstens HC, Tuinzing DB, Golding RP, Van der Kwast WA. Inclination of the temporomandibular joint eminence and anterior disc displacement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;18:228-232.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  14. Panmekiate S, Petersson A, Akerman S. Angulation and prominence of the posterior slope of the eminence of the temporomandibular joint in relation to disc position. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1991;20:205-208.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. Fan XC, Singh D, Ma LS, Piehslinger E, Huang XF, Rausch-Fan X. Is there an association between temporomandibular disorders and articular eminence inclination? A systematic review. Diagnostics (Basel) 2020;11:29.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  16. Paknahad M, Shahidi S, Akhlaghian M, Abolvardi M. Is mandibular fossa morphology and articular eminence inclination associated with temporomandibular dysfunction? J Dent (Shiraz) 2016;17:134-141.
    Pubmed KoreaMed
  17. Rabelo KA, Sousa Melo SL, Torres MGG, Campos PSF, Bento PM, Melo DP. Condyle excursion angle, articular eminence inclination, and temporomandibular joint morphologic relations with disc displacement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;75:938.e1-938.e10.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  18. Sülün T, Cemgil T, Duc JM, Rammelsberg P, Jäger L, Gernet W. Morphology of the mandibular fossa and inclination of the articular eminence in patients with internal derangement and in symptom-free volunteers. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001;92:98-107.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Sato S, Kawamura H, Motegi K, Takahashi K. Morphology of the mandibular fossa and the articular eminence in temporomandibular joints with anterior disk displacement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;25:236-238.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Çağlayan F, Sümbüllü MA, Akgül HM. Associations between the articular eminence inclination and condylar bone changes, condylar movements, and condyle and fossa shapes. Oral Radiol 2014;30:84-91.
    CrossRef
  21. Cohen A, Sela MC, Shooraki N, Alterman M, Casap N. The influence of articular eminence morphology on temporomandibular joint anterior dislocations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2021;131:9-15.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Nam H, Shim YJ, Kang JK. Articular eminence morphology of temporomandibular joint in young Korean adults. J Oral Med Pain 2019;44:59-64.
  23. Choi DS, Jang IS, Cha BK. Changes in height and inclination of the articular eminence during the growth period. Korean J Orthod 2010;40:411-420.
    CrossRef
  24. Isberg A, Westesson PL. Steepness of articular eminence and movement of the condyle and disk in asymptomatic temporomandibular joints. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;86:152-157.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  25. Sümbüllü MA, Cağlayan F, Akgül HM, Yilmaz AB. Radiological examination of the articular eminence morphology using cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012;41:234-240.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  26. Ugboko VI, Oginni FO, Ajike SO, Olasoji HO, Adebayo ET. A survey of temporomandibular joint dislocation: aetiology, demographics, risk factors and management in 96 Nigerian cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;34:499-502.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Lewis RP, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS. Sex differences in mandibular movements during opening and closing. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:294-303.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  28. Oh SC, Han JS. Radiographic evaluation of stiffness of articular eminence in the temporomandibular joint(TMJ) of Korean using dental cone-beam CT. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2013;29:163-173.
    CrossRef
  29. Humphreys H. Age changes in the temporomandibular joint and their importance in orthodontics. Int J Orthod Oral Surg Radiogr 1932;18:809-815.
    CrossRef
  30. Hinton RJ. Changes in articular eminence morphology with dental function. Am J Phys Anthropol 1981;54:439-455.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  31. Wu CK, Hsu JT, Shen YW, Chen JH, Shen WC, Fuh LJ. Assessments of inclinations of the mandibular fossa by computed tomography in an Asian population. Clin Oral Investig 2012;16:443-450.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Ichikawa W, Laskin DM. Anatomic study of the angulation of the lateral and midpoint inclined planes of the articular eminence. Cranio 1989;7:22-26.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  33. Honey OB, Scarfe WC, Hilgers MJ, et al. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint: comparisons with panoramic radiology and linear tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:429-438.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  34. Park HJ, Seo YS, Yoon AH, Kim JH, Ryu JW. Assessment of the thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa using cone beam computed tomography in asymptomatic Korean adult patients. J Oral Med Pain 2019;44:112-117.
    CrossRef