Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 30225

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2024 | Month : November | Volume : 18 | Issue : 11 | Page : ZC18 - ZC23 Full Version

Morphometric Assessment of Condyle and Glenoid Fossa using Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Gujarati Population: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: November 1, 2024 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/73608.20231
Vaibhavi Mehta, Pritesh Ruparelia, Rashmi Venkatesh

1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Piparia, Vadodara, Gujarat, India. 2. Professor, Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India. 3. Professor, Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Piparia, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Vaibhavi Mehta,
Senior Lecturer, Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Post Piparia, Ta. Waghodia, Dist. Vadodara-391760, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: vaibhavishukla69@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Several morphological alterations and remodelling occur in the mandibular condyle and glenoid fossa to adapt to trauma, malocclusion and other developmental disorders. Understanding these changes will aid healthcare providers in comprehending the pathophysiology of various Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) problems.

Aim: To evaluate the morphometric attributes of the condyle and glenoid fossa in the Gujarati population using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).

Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional radiographic morphometric investigation was conducted at the Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology at the College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre in Bopal, Gujarat, India using departmental archives from September 2019 to September 2022. A total of 40 CBCT scans (80 TMJs) were performed and analysed using the Papaya 3D and Genoray CBCT machines, along with Triana imaging software. Measurements were taken for condylar length, width, height, joint space (anterior, superior, posterior, medial, lateral) and the thickness of the Roof of the Glenoid Fossa (RGF) (sagittal, coronal) on the CBCT images. The aforementioned parameters were compared between genders, age groups and sides using a paired t-test and statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software package (Chicago, IL, USA), version 21.0 for Microsoft (MS) Windows.

Results: The mean age of the study participants was 34±9.6 years. The condylar width between males and females was the only condylar characteristic that differed significantly (p-value 0.001). Apart from the gender analysis, no statistically significant variations (p>0.05) were found in the thickness of the RGF when comparing age or side. However, in the gender-wise examination of joint space, males had significantly higher measurements of Superior Joint Space (SJS), Medial Joint Space (MJS) and Lateral Joint Space (LJS) than females.

Conclusion: Gujarati males had a significantly larger condylar width compared to females. When considering gender-specific data, males also exhibited greater SJSs, MJSs and LJSs, as well as increased thickness of the RGF. The results of the present study may provide a relevant and comparable reference for the clinical assessment of individuals with healthy, functional, or pathological TMJs.

Keywords

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), Mandibular condyle, Temporomandibular joint, Temporomandibular joint disorders

In Temporomandibular Joint Disorder (TMD), the mandibular condyle undergoes numerous morphological changes and remodelling to accommodate malocclusion, trauma and other developmental abnormalities (1). When the width of the radiolucent joint space is uniform on both the anterior and posterior aspects, the condyle is positioned concentrically. Eccentric condylar positioning, which leads to alterations in joint spaces, may indicate abnormalities such as disc displacement, disc perforation, or the presence of blood within the joint space (2). Additionally, there is an association between disc perforation, the thickness of the RGF and the posterior attachment. The thickness of the RGF may increase when the TMJ, in conjunction with disc displacement or perforation, is associated with issues such as the displacement of the mandibular condyle into the cranial fossa due to trauma, the intracranial extension of a tumour, or infections that spread to the TMJ, particularly when the RGF has a minimum thickness (3).

The CBCT is a new imaging modality for orofacial structures that offers a minimal radiation dose, good spatial resolution of osseous structures, high patient acceptance and low cost. Consequently, it has become increasingly important in oral and maxillofacial radiology (1). To distinguish normal variations from aberrant ones, a complete understanding of the structure, anatomy and morphology is required (4). Many studies on the analysis of the glenoid fossa, joint spaces and condyle have been conducted independently using various approaches (5),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10). For repeatable and reliable measurements, reference points must be fixed. Furthermore, this study represents the first morphometric TMJ analysis conducted on the Gujarati population. Therefore, utilising a specific reference point across multiple CBCT sections, all TMJ parameters were assessed for morphometric and geometric analysis in clinically healthy, asymptomatic Gujarati patients in this experiment.

Material and Methods

The present cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology at the College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre in Bopal, Gujarat, India from September 2019 to September 2022. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethical Committee (ethical reference no.: CDSRC/IEC/20190702/18).

The CBCT scans were performed at the maximal intercuspation level with the temporal rod immobilised. The scan parameters were set to 60-90 kVp and 4-12 mA, using a Papaya 3D machine from Genoray, Korea. Measurements were taken using Triana imaging software. A total of 40 subjects (20 males and 20 females) with CBCT scans taken between 2018 and 2019 were retrospectively analysed in Triana imaging software between September 2019 to March 2021.

Inclusion criteria: The present study included large Field Of View (FOV) CBCT scans (16×8 cm and 16×14 cm) with clear resolution and adequate coverage that displayed bilateral TMJs. CBCT scans taken for various dental treatments unrelated to TMD and without a history of trauma were considered for the study.

Exclusion criteria: The CBCT scans of individuals with systemic illnesses such as Sjögren’s syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and reactive arthritis; a history of prior orthognathic surgery; severe facial asymmetry; condylar hyperplasia or hypoplasia; scans with insufficient clarity or resolution; patients with a history of any tumour or growth in the orofacial region that could affect the morphology of the condyle; and individuals younger than eighteen were excluded in the study.

Sample size calculation: In August 2019, pilot research with five patients (10 joints) was carried out and based on this sample size of 40 was achieved after using formula.

Z1-a/22SD2/ d2=(1.96)2 (3.2)2 / (1)2=40.58 (Max. value of SD from pilot study=3.2)

Study Procedure

Image analysis: The volumetric data set was created from the basic projection frames. Contiguous, colour-correlated, perpendicular axial, coronal and sagittal 2D Multiplanar Reconstruction (MPR) slices were then sectioned from the visual orthogonal images. The constructed data sets have been generated as files for Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) and the image stacks have been transferred to a Dell Vostro 3558 personal PC. The axial view presenting the maximum mediolateral dimension of the condyle, using a 1 mm thickness, was selected as the reference view for secondary reconstruction. Occasionally, the chosen slice varied depending on whether the right or left-side was being evaluated. Metric analysis of the morphology of the mandibular condyle, joint space and glenoid fossa was recorded as described by Hilgers ML et al., Dalili Z et al., and Al-Koshab M et al., (Table/Fig 1) (5),(6),(11).

Condylar measurement and parameters (Table/Fig 2),(Table/Fig 3),(Table/Fig 4):

Corrected sagittal section for condylar length, joint space (anterior, superior, posterior) and roof of glenoid fossa thickness: Connecting the medial and lateral poles of the condyle, a panoramic line was drawn in axial slices along the condyle. Subsequently, sagittal slices were acquired parallel to the longitudinal axis of the mandibular condyle. The midpoint of the condyle and the central sagittal slice were used as reference slices for measurements (Table/Fig 5).

Corrected coronal sections for condylar width, joint space (MJS and LJS) and RGF thickness: For secondary reconstruction, an axial view that displayed the condylar processes at their largest mediolateral extent was used as a reference. From a selected axial image, coronal slices with a thickness of 1 mm were obtained, aligned with the longitudinal axis of the mandibular condyle. The central coronal slice was considered the reference slice (Table/Fig 6).

Corrected sagittal section for condylar height: The axial image was adjusted to visualise the condyle and the superior tip of the coronoid process (Table/Fig 7)A. An oblique 2D MPR (10 mm) was then constructed through the tip of the coronoid and the anterior margin of the external auditory meatus (Table/Fig 7)B.

The schematic and radiographic presentations of the condyle, joint space and glenoid fossa thickness measurements are shown in (Table/Fig 8)A-J,(Table/Fig 9)A-G, respectively.

Statistical Analysis

The measurements were processed and analysed using the statistical software package SPSS (Chicago, IL, USA) version 21.0 for MS Windows. For each variable, the mean and standard deviation were determined based on TMJ sides, age groups and gender (Table/Fig 10). Since the data were continuous, it was subjected to a t-test for group comparison, considering a significance level of 5% (p<0.05).

Results

Out of 40 subjects aged 18 to 50 years, 20 (50%) were male and 20 (50%) were female, with a mean age of 34±9.6 years. The participants were divided into two groups: 1) those under 25 years of age, consisting of 14 males (35%) and 9 females (22.5%); and 2) those aged 25 years or older, consisting of 6 males (15%) and 11 females (27.5%). All 40 participants underwent a morphometric assessment of their left and right TMJs (Table/Fig 10).

In the present study, the sizes of the condyle, joint spaces and RGF varied between genders. The condylar width was higher in males (mean value of 19.1±2.11 mm) compared to females (mean value of 16.3±1.88 mm). With the exception of age and side-wise analysis, the condylar width in the present study varied significantly with gender (p-value=0.001). In the gender-specific joint space analysis, the mean values of the SJS, MJS and LJS were significantly higher in males compared to females (p<0.05). Regarding the thickness of the glenoid fossa, no significant variations were found in age and side-wise analysis, except in gender analysis, where it was higher in males compared to females (p-values for sagittal RGF: 0.014; coronal RGF: 0.001) (Table/Fig 10).

Discussion

Researchers used CBCT scans of 40 individuals, comprising 20 females and 20 males, to assess the condyle, joint space and glenoid fossa in the coronal and sagittal sections. In the current study, only condylar width, SJS, MJS, LJS, Sagittal RGF and coronal RGF were found to be larger in males than in females. Other CBCT TMJ assessment parameters did not show any significant differences when analysed age-wise or side-wise. The authors of the study contrasted their findings with previous studies, as seen in (Table/Fig 11)A,B (1),(6),(7),(8),(9),(10),(11),(12),(13),(14),(15),(16),(17).

In a comparative analysis based on gender, males exhibited greater condylar width than females. Conversely, there was minimal difference in the mean condylar length and height values between both genders. The difference in condylar width was statistically significant between the genders (p=0.001), with the exception of condylar height and length. Males have larger condylar dimensions than females due to the overall differences in condyle size between the genders (18).

According to research conducted by Al-Koshab M et al., and Jyotirmay et al., the differences in condylar length, width and height between both sides were statistically non significant (11),(14). These findings were consistent with the current research. However, Chaurasia A et al., found that condylar length and width varied significantly (p=0.001) between the two sides (7). The observation that individuals with malocclusion favoured one side for chewing could be explained by a morphologically altered asymmetry between the two sides (19),(20).

The differences in condylar length, width and height between age groups were statistically insignificant. This outcome is in accordance with the findings of Chaurasia A et al., and Nithin I et al., (7),(12). However, Ebner KA et al., found no differences in radiographic changes between normal joints and those with early or moderate to marked osseous changes in 18 human cadaver specimens (21). Degenerative joint disease can lead to resorptive and proliferative changes that affect dimensional measurements. The dimensions of proliferating joints may be larger than those of early resorptive joints due to the flatness of the articular surfaces (21).

According to the findings of Dalili Z et al., Vankadara S et al., Al-Koshab M et al., and Nithin I et al., men had larger linear measurements of joint spaces than women, particularly in the posterior and superior spaces (6),(10),(11),(12). The current investigation yielded comparable results. The TMJ compartment soft-tissue thickness reported by Lubsen CC et al., suggests that men may have larger joint gaps (22). According to Hinton RJ, male sexual dimorphism also results in differences in the overall size of the temporal fossa and the mandibular condyle (23). In line with the conclusions of Dalili Z et al., Ikeda K and Kawamura A and this research found that the SJS value was highest for both genders (6),(24). However, the results reported in the present study did not align with those reported by Vankadara S et al., and Al-Koshab M et al., likely due to variations in race and ethnicity, measurement points and sample size (10),(11).

In a side-by-side comparative analysis, the difference between both sides of the TMJ was statistically not significant. This finding is consistent with the studies reported by Kecik D et al., and Rodrigues AF et al., (25),(26). Rodrigues AF et al., reported that the values for the right TMJ were 1.29 mm for AJS, 1.57 mm for SJS and 1.87 mm for PJS, while for the left TMJ, the values were 1.22 mm for AJS, 1.59 mm for SJS and 1.65 mm for PJS (26). The researchers noted that the differences in AJS and SJS for the right and left-sides were statistically not significant, except for PJS, which could be attributed to the various dimensions of the mandibular fossa. The results of the present study did not align with those reported by Dalili Z et al., and Nithin I et al., who observed significant distinctions in the AJS, SJS, PJS, MJS and LJS values between the left and right-sides (6),(12). Cohlmia JT et al., also investigated different skeletal patterns and malocclusions, finding that the right and left-sides exhibited significantly different values in the posterior and SJSs (20). This research suggested that patients with malocclusion may have a preferred side for mastication, which could contribute to altered morphology and volume, accounting for the asymmetry in condylar placement between the left and right-sides of the glenoid fossa (12),(19).

The difference in age groups in the present study was not significant, which is consistent with the study conducted by Vankadara S et al., (10). However, the findings of Nithin I et al., study did not align with ours, as they reported that 119 patients showed linear measurements of anterior, posterior and superior space that gradually declined with age (12). This discrepancy could be attributed to differences in sample size between the studies.

The difference in sagittal RGF and coronal RGF between both genders was statistically significant, which is in agreement with the findings of Khojastepour L et al., and Alkoshab M et al., (3),(11). Conversely, Soydan D et al., found that the gender difference was not statistically significant, possibly due to variations in the total number of joints included in their study (16). In the side-wise comparison analysis, the mean values of RGF thickness were 1.78 mm on the right-side and 1.73 mm on the left-side. Park H-J et al., reported that the mean thickness of the RGF was greater on the left-side (0.77±0.44 mm) than on the right-side (0.74±0.33 mm) (27). Although this difference was not statistically significant, it was consistent with the results of the present study. However, Nithin I et al., and Rodrigues AF et al., found significant variation between the two sides (12),(26). Changes in TMJ structure and positioning asymmetries can be caused by factors such as tooth loss, dental abrasion, premature occlusal contact points, functional mandibular deviations and unilateral posterior crossbite.

In the age-wise comparison, the statistical analysis showed no significant difference between the two age groups, which aligns with the findings of Nithin I et al., (12). Nevertheless, the results published by Park H-J et al., indicated that RGF thickness varied statistically between age groups- 0.73 mm for those aged ≤40 years and 0.86 mm for those >40 years (27). These results suggest that the glenoid fossa undergoes age-related alterations. The glenoid fossa may remodel in response to dysfunction or disuse, as well as changes in articular dynamics linked to adaptive musculoskeletal behaviour (27),(28). The differences in results from the studies may be attributed to variations in age and the smaller number of participants included in their research.

Limitation(s)

Considering that the present study focuses on only one ethnicity, the findings cannot be generalised to a larger population. Further research is recommended, comparing healthy participants with TMD patients. Additionally, studies are needed for various age groups under 18 years.

Conclusion

The findings of the present investigation demonstrated that males had significantly larger condylar widths, SJSs, MJSs, LJSs and sagittal and coronal thicknesses of the glenoid fossa roof compared to females. A detailed CBCT analysis of the TMJ would aid in precisely evaluating morphological variations in various maxillofacial alignments, as well as in analysing positional and morphological TMJ changes following extraction and non extraction orthodontic treatment, facemask therapy, functional appliances (orthopaedic) and orthognathic surgical procedures. Considering the anatomical variability in dimensions, it is concluded that morphometric TMJ evaluation using CBCT is necessary for the diagnosis and management of TMDs.

References

1.
Vemareddy S, Kannan A, Raghuram P, Kannan N. Assessment of morphological changes of articular eminence and condyle using CBCT. Int J Maxillofac Imaging. 2019;5(3):58-62. [crossref]
2.
Panchbhai A. Temporomandibular joint space. Indian J Oral Health Res. 2017;3(2):47. [crossref]
3.
Khojastepour L, Haghnegahdar A, Eisazadeh M, Bahreini M. Comparison between glenoid fossa roof thickness in TMD and non-TMD patients, a CBCT study. J Dent (Shiraz). 2019;20(3):165-70.
4.
Alam MK, Ganji KK, Munisekhar MS, Alanazi NS, Alsharif HN, Iqbal A, et al. A 3D cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) investigation of mandibular condyle morphometry: Gender determination, disparities, asymmetry assessment and relationship with mandibular size. Saudi Dent J. 2021;33(7):687-92. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Hilgers ML, Scarfe WC, Scheetz JP, Farman AG. Accuracy of linear temporomandibular joint measurements with cone beam computed tomography and digital cephalometric radiography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(6):803-11. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Dalili Z, Khaki N, Kia SJ, Salamat F. Assessing joint space and condylar position in the people with normal function of temporomandibular joint with cone-beam computed tomography. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012;9(5):607-12. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Chaurasia A, Katheriya G, Khan N. Morphometric analysis of articular eminence of temporomandibular joint in Indian paediatric population: A CBCT study. Indian Journal of Forensic Odontology. 2017;10:91-103. [crossref]
8.
Ishwarkumar S, Pillay P, Degama BZ, Satyapal KS. An osteometric evaluation of the mandibular condyle in a black KwaZulu-Natal population. International Journal of Morphology 2016;34(3):848-53. [crossref]
9.
Imanimoghaddam M, Madani AS, Mahdavi P, Bagherpour A, Darijani M, Ebrahimnejad H. Evaluation of condylar positions in patients with temporomandibular disorders: A cone-beam computed tomographic study. Imaging Sci Dent. 2016;46(2):127-31. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Vankadara S, Akula B, Nissi K. Assessment and comparison of condylar position based on joint space dimensions and gelb 4/7 grid using CBCT. Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology. 2021;33:06-11. [crossref]
11.
Al-koshab M, Nambiar P, John J. Assessment of condyle and glenoid fossa morphology using CBCT in South-East Asians. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0121682. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Nithin I, Ahmed J, Sujir N, Shenoy N, Binnal A, Ongole R. Morphological assessment of TMJ spaces, mandibular condyle, and glenoid fossa using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT): A retrospective analysis. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2021;31(1):78-85. [crossref]
13.
Hasebe A, Yamaguchi T, Nakawaki T, Hikita Y, Katayama K, Maki K. Comparison of condylar size among different anteroposterior and vertical skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2019;89(2):306-11. Doi: 10.2319/032518-229.1. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Jyotirmay, Singh SK, Adarsh K, Sinha A, Kumar A, Sharan S. Evaluation of size of the condyle in vertical and anteroposterior skeletal conditions with the help of cone- beam computed tomography. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2021;22(2):189-93. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Yasa Y, Akgül HM. Correction to: Comparative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of the osseous morphology of the temporomandibular joint in temporomandibular dysfunction patients and asymptomatic individuals. Oral Radiol. 2018;34(2):186. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Soydan D, Doğan S, Canger EM, Cos¸ gunarslan A, Akgün IE, Kis¸ HC. Effect of internal derangements and degenerative bone changes on the minimum thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa in temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol. 2020;36(1):25-31. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Tariq QUA, Jan A. Condylar size and position, comparison among different sagittal skeletal relationships: A CBCT study. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2023;33(05):509-15. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Tadej G, Engstrom C, Borrman H, Christiansen EL. Mandibular condyle morphology in relation to malocclusions in children. Angle Orthod. 1989;59(3):187-94.
19.
Blaschke DD, Blaschke TJ. A method for quantitatively determining temporomandibular joint bony relationships. J Dent Res. 1981;60(1):35-43. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Cohlmia JT, Ghosh J, Sinha PK, Nanda RS, Currier GF. Tomographic assessment of temporomandibular joints in patients with malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 1996;66(1):27-35.
21.
Ebner KA, Otis LL, Zakhary R, Danforth RA. Axial temporomandibular joint morphology: A correlative study of radiographic and gross anatomic findings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1990;69(2):247-52. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Lubsen CC, Hansson TL, Nordström BB, Solberg WK. Histomorphometry of age and sex changes in mandibular condyles of young human adults. Arch Oral Biol. 1987;32(10):729-33. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Hinton RJ. Relationships between mandibular joint size and craniofacial size in human groups. Arch Oral Biol. 1983;28(1):37-43. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Ikeda K, Kawamura A. Assessment of optimal condylar position with limited cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135(4):495-501. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Kecik D, Kocadereli I, Saatci I. Condylar disc relationships and vibration energy in asymptomatic class I 9- to 12-year olds. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(1):54-62.
26.
Rodrigues AF, Fraga MR, Vitral RW. Computed tomography evaluation of the temporomandibular joint in Class I malocclusion patients: Condylar symmetry and condyle-fossa relationship. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136(2):192-98. [crossref][PubMed]
27.
Park H-J, Seo Y-S, Lim S-H, Ryu J-W. Assessment of the thickness of the roof of the glenoid Fossa using cone beam computed tomography in orthognathic surgery patients: A preliminary study. Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain. 2019;44(4):154-59. [crossref]
28.
Cohlmia JT, Ghosh J, Sinha PK, Nanda RS, Currier GF. Tomographic assessment of temporomandibular joints in patients with malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 1996;66(1):27-35.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/73608.20231

Date of Submission: Jun 17, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Aug 03, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Sep 23, 2024
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2024

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 18, 2024
• Manual Googling: Aug 08, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Sep 21, 2024 (18%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 8

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com