YETİŞKİN VE ADOLESANLARDA KORONOİD ÇIKINTININ VE KONDİLİN AÇI VE UZUNLUK YÖNÜNDEN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı yetişkin ve adolesanlarda kondil ve koronoid çıkıntının açı ve uzunluk yönünden değerlendirilmesidir. Yöntem: Araştırmamıza Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi (KIBT) görüntüleri olan 184 hasta dahil edildi. Hastalar 2 gruba ayrıldı: 92’si adolesan (kadın, n=48; erkek, n=44) ve 92’si yetişkin (kadın, n=46; erkek, n=46). Hastaların kondil açısı (CoA), koronoid açısı (CrA), kondil uzunluğu (CoD) ve koronoid uzunluğu (CrD) yetişkin ve adolesanlar arasında değerlendirildi. Verilerin normal dağılıp dağılmadığını değerlendirmek için ShapiroWilk testi yapıldı. Gruplar arasındaki farklılıkları değerlendirmek için normal dağılım gösteren verilerde bağımsız örneklemde t-testi, normal dağılım göstermeyen verilerde ise Mann-Whitney U testi yapıldı. Bulgular: Ortalama CrA değeri adolesanlarda 120,23 ± 5,27˚ ve yetişkinlerde 115,57 ± 6,99˚ olarak bulundu. Ortalama CoA değeri adolesanlarda 111,33 ± 5,18˚ ve yetişkinlerde 113,14 ± 6,19˚ olarak bulundu. Ortalama CoD değeri adolesanlarda 16,43 ± 2,57 mm ve yetişkinlerde 15,16 ± 2,81 mm olarak bulundu. Ortalama CrD değeri adolesanlarda 11,71 ± 2,24 mm ve yetişkinlerde 13,90 ± 3,53mm olarak bulundu. CrA, CoA, CrD ve CoD yetişkin ve adolesanlar arasında karşılaştırıldığında, CrA, CoD ve CrD değerlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulundu. CrD yetişkinlerde adolesanlara göre daha yüksek bulundu. CrA ve CoD ise adolesanlarda yetişkinlere göre daha yüksek bulundu. Yetişkin ve adolesanlarda cinsiyet açısından karşılaştırılma yapıldığında CrA, CoA, CrD ve CoD değerlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Sonuç: CrD yetişkinlerde adolesanlara göre daha yüksek bulundu. CrA ve CoD ise adolesanlarda yetişkinlere göre daha yüksek bulundu. Yetişkin ve adolesanlarda cinsiyet açısından karşılaştırılma yapıldığında CrA, CoA, CrD ve CoD değerlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Ayrıntılı değerlendirme için veri sayısının fazla olduğu çalışmalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır.

EVALUATION IN TERMS OF ANGLE AND LENGTH OF THE CORONOID PROCESS AND CONDYLE IN ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the condyle and coronoid process in terms of angle and length in adults and adolescents.Methods: A total of 184 patients who had Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images were included in this study. The patients weredivided into 2 groups, including 92 adolescents (female, n=48; male, n=44) and 92 adults (female, n=46; male, n=46). The condyle angle (CoA),coronoid angle (CrA), condyle length (CoD) and coronoid length (CrD) were evaluated in adults and the adolescents. Shapiro-Wilk test wasperformed to evaluate the normality of the variances. After determination at the normal distribution of the data, statistical analysis was performed byusing independent-samples t-test. The data without normal distribution were statistically analyzed by using Mann-Whitney U test.Results: The mean CrA was 120.23 ± 5.27˚ in the adolescents and 115.57 ± 6.99˚ in the adults. The mean CoA was 111.33 ± 5.18˚ in the adolescentsand 113.14 ± 6.19˚ in the adults. The mean CoD was 16.43 ± 2.57 mm in the adolescents and 15.16 ± 2.81 mm in the adults. The mean CrD was11.71 ± 2.24 mm in the adolescents and 13.90 ± 3.53 mm in the adults. When the CrA, CoA, CrD and CoD values were compared with the adultsand the adolescents, statistically significant differences were found in their CrA, CoD and CrD values. CrD was higher in the adults than theadolescents. CrA and CoD were higher in the adolescents than in the adults. There was no statistically significant difference in CrA, CoA, CrD andCoD values when these groups were compared in terms of sex.Conclusion: CrD was higher in the adults than the adolescents. CrA and CoD were higher in the adolescents than in the adults. There was nostatistically significant difference in CrA, CoA, CrD and CoD values when these groups were compared in terms of sex. In order to evaluate lengthsand angles in more detail between adults and adolescents, studies including more detail datasets are needed.

PDF

___

1. Bakirci S, Ari I, Kafa IM. Morphometric characteristics and typology of the coronoid process of the mandible. Acta Med Mediter. 2013;29:683-6.
2. Assari A. Characteristics of Mandibular Parameters in Different Age Groups. A CBCT Assessment. EC Dental Science. 2017;14:95-103.
3. Dutra V, Yang J, Devlin H, Susin C. Mandibular bone remodelling in adults: evaluation of panoramic radiographs. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2004;33(5):323-8.
4. Zangouei-Booshehri M, Aghili H-A, Abasi M, EzoddiniArdakani F. Agreement between panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs for measuring the gonial angle. Iranian Journal of Radiology. 2012;9(4):178.
5. Ogawa T, Osato S, Shishido Y, Misaki K. Relationships between the gonial angle and mandibular ramus morphology in dentate subjects: a panoramic radiophotometric study. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2012;38(3):203-10.
6. Leversha J, McKeough G, Myrteza A, Skjellrup-Wakefiled H, Welsh J, Sholapurkar A. Age and gender correlation of gonial angle, ramus height and bigonial width in dentate subjects in a dental school in Far North Queensland. Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry. 2016;8(1):e49.
7. Genú PR, Vasconcellos RJdH, Oliveira BPd, Vasconcelos BCGd, Delgado NCdC. Analysis of anatomical landmarks of the mandibular interforaminal region using CBCT in a Brazilian population. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences. 2014;13(4):303-7.
8. Subbaramaiah M, Bajpe R, Jagannatha S, Jayanthi K. A study of various forms of mandibular coronoid process in determination of sex. Ind J Clin Anat Physiol. 2015;2:199- 203.
9. Petersson A. What you can and cannot see in TMJ imaging– an overview related to the RDC/TMD diagnostic system. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2010;37(10):771-8.
10. Tavassol F, Spalthoff S, Essig H, Bredt M, Gellrich N-C, Kokemüller H. Elongated coronoid process: CT-based quantitative analysis of the coronoid process and review of literature. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2012;41(3):331-8.
11. Başaran M, Görmez Ö, Bozdemir E, Yıldırım D. Konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi görüntülerinde mandibular koronoid proçes boyutlarının değerlendirilmesi. Selcuk Dental Journal.2019;6(4):425-8.
12. Flores-Mir C, Rosenblatt MR, Major PW, Carey JP, Heo G. Measurement accuracy and reliability of tooth length on conventional and CBCT reconstructed panoramic radiographs. Dental press journal of orthodontics. 2014;19(5):45-53.
13. Goodburn EA, Ross DA, Organization WH. A Picture of health?: a review and annotated bibliography of the health of young people in developing countries. World Health Organization; 1995.
14. Bilgili E. Unilateral Mandibular Koronoid Hiperplazisi Olgularının Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi ile İncelenmesi. Van Tıp Dergisi. 2017;24(4):250-3.
15. Saccucci M, Polimeni A, Festa F, Tecco S. Do skeletal cephalometric characteristics correlate with condylar volume, surface and shape? A 3D analysis. Head & face medicine. 2012;8(1):15.
16. Kurita H, Ohtsuka A, Kobayashi H, Kurashina K. Resorption of the postero-superior corner of the lateral part of the mandibular condyle correlates with progressive TMJ internal derangement. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2003;32(4):363-7.
17. Cai X-Y, Jin J-M, Yang C. Changes in disc position, disc length, and condylar height in the temporomandibular joint with anterior disc displacement: a longitudinal retrospective magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2011;69(11):e340-e6.
18. Park W, Kim B-C, Yu H-S, Yi C-K, Lee S-H. Architectural characteristics of the normal and deformity mandible revealed by three-dimensional functional unit analysis. Clinical oral investigations. 2010;14(6):691-8.