[Preliminary Measurement and Analysis of the Condylar Movement Envelope Surface Parameters in Healthy Adults].
K N Chen,J Q Jiang,J L Wang,Y C Sun,C B Guo,X L Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20220630-00355
2022-01-01
Abstract:Objective: To measure and analyze parameters of the three-dimensional (3D) model of the condylar movement envelope surface (ES) and provide a reference for the design of the temporomandibular prosthesis. Methods: Thirty-four healthy adults aged (25.4±2.8) years were recruited from the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology as subjects. There were 9 males and 25 females, most of them were university students and others outside the university have received undergraduate education or above. Condylar movement ES were obtained using the previous method on the 3D trajectory of condyle. The simulations of condylar movement were projected according to opening movements, protrusion movements, and lateral movements respectively. The total area of the ES and the area proportions of models formed by above different mandibular movements were measured and calculated. The adults' head and maxillofacial 3D models reconstructed by cone beam CT were registered with ES in Geomagic Studio. The inner and outer poles of the condyle, the corrective sagittal axis of the ES, and the median sagittal plane (MSP) were calibrated in registration models using Geomagic Studio, and the parameters were measured as follows: the anteroposterior and medialateral diameters of the condyle, the anteroposterior diameters and the transverse diameters (anterior, middle and posterior parts) of the ES, the angles between the corrective sagittal axis of the ES and MSP (ES-MSP). Pearson correlation analysis was performed by SPSS 24.0. Results: The total area of the ES was (760±133) mm2, the opening movement part accounted for (63.3±15.2)%, the protrusion movement part accounted for (14.9±9.6)%, the lateral movement part accounted for (21.8±13.3)%. Parameter measurements were as follows: mediolateral diameters of condyle was (19.8±2.3) mm; anteroposterior diameter of the ES was (21.2±3.1) mm, the transverse diameters (anterior, middle and posterior parts) of the ES were (20.6±2.4), (20.4±2.4), (22.0±2.6) mm, respectively; the transverse diameters of the ES were about 2 mm larger than that of the condyle. The angle between the corrective sagittal axis of ES and the MSP was 6.8°±6.2°. The coefficient of variation (CV) in these parameters showed: CV of the transverse diameters (anterior, middle and posterior parts) of the ES and mediolateral diameter of the condyle were 0.98, 0.99, 0.93, respectively (P<0.001). CV of aera of ES and mediolateral diameter of the condyle was 0.64 (P=0.002). CV of aera of ES and anteroposterior diameter of ES was 0.62 (P=0.004). Conclusions: The 3D envelope surface model formed by mandibular opening movements accounted for the largest proportion of the ES. The corrective sagittal axis of the ES was at an angle to the MSP, the transverse diameters (anterior, middle and posterior parts) of the ES were approximately 2 mm larger than the mediolateral diameter of the condyle, the transverse diameters (anterior, middle and posterior parts) of the ES were highly positively correlated with the mediolateral diameter of the condyle.