%0 Journal Article
%T The relationship between the articular disc in magnetic resonance imaging and the condyle in cone beam computed tomography: A retrospective study.
%A Chen B
%A Li C
%J J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg
%V 0
%N 0
%D 2024 Jun 8
%M 38857693
%F 2.48
%R 10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101940
%X <B>BACKGROUND: </B>The authors retrospectively studied the relationship between the morphology and position of the articular disc in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the morphology and position of the condyle in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), with the purpose for providing reference for clinical diagnosis and treatment of temporomandibular disorders (TMD).<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Patients with both CBCT and MRI imaging data were studied retrospectively, excluding TMJ tumour, fracture, severe condylar morphological abnormalities, non-intercuspal position, and poor quality images. A total of 744 temporomandibular joints (TMJs) from 372 patients were included, with the mean age of 25.94±11.04Y (75 males and 297 females). T2-weighted image (T2WI) of MRI imagings were used to evaluate disc morphology and disc displacement, while CBCT was obtained to evaluate the condylar bone and sagittal condylar position. Data were analysed by Pearson Chi square test and Spearman correlation coefficient.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>THE DISTRIBUTION OF 744 TMJS IS AS FOLLOWS: 1) DISC MORPHOLOGY: contracture (37.1 %) > biconcave (32.9 %) > irregular (18.5 %) > lengthened (11.4 %); 2) disc position: ADDWoR (48.3 %) > NA (26.9 %) > ADDWR (21.6 %) > PDDWR (2.8 %) > PDDWoR (0.4 %); 3) condylar position: concentric (43.7 %) > posterior (37.6 %) > anterior (18.7 %); 4) condylar bone: normal (63.4 %)> abnormal (36.6 %). There were significant differences in the distribution of disc morphology and disc position between the sex (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the distribution of disc position and condylar morphology amongst the age groups (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the distribution of disc position, condylar position and condylar morphology amongst disc morphology (P < 0.05), and there were positive correlation between disc position(r = 0.703, P = 0.000), the score of condyle (r = 0.478, P = 0.000) and disc morphology respectively. There were significant differences in the distribution of disc position and condylar position amongst condylar morphology (P < 0.05). There was a positive correlation between disc position and condyle morphology (r = 0.413, P = 0.000), and a negative correlation between condyle position and condyle morphology (r=-0.152, P = 0.000). There were significant differences in the distribution of disc position amongst condylar position (P < 0.05), but there was no linear correlation (P = 0.159).<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>The mutual distribution of disc morphology, disc position, condylar morphology and condylar position was statistically significant. Disc displacement did not necessarily lead to condylar bone changes, but 92.7 % TMJs with condylar bone abnormalities had disc displacement.<BR><B>BACKGROUND: </B>This study was retrospectively registered on 28/03/2022 and endorsed by the Ethics committee (LCYJ2022014).