Comparison of condylar translation in hyperdivergent and hypodivergent patients: a pilot study

Abstract

Introduction: The present pilot study aims to compare the condylar translation between patients with hyperdivergent and hypodivergent facial pattern. Methods: after analysis of photographs and cephalometric data, sample obtained was divided into two groups: hyperdivergent (n = 12) and hypodivergent (n = 12). For evaluation of condylar translation, temporomandibular joint planigraphys with maximum mouth opening and maximum intercuspal were performed. Subsequently, the tracing of maximum mouth opening in the articulation of each planigraphy was carried out. Metric values were obtained from the measurement of the distance between the point in the lower region of the articular eminence and the point in the most anterior superior mandibular condyle. Results: no statistically significant differences were found between the groups compared. However, the values obtained for horizontal translation performed by the right mandibular condyle were 6.00 mm for the hyperdivergent group, and 3.25 mm in the hypodivergent group. For condyle on the opposite side the horizontal translation averages were 5.66 mm for the hyperdivergent group, and of 4.50 mm for the hypodivergent group. Conclusions: the divergence between the means suggests that hyperdivergent patients show higher condylar translation in both condyles when compared with hypodivergent patients. Further studies should be conducted aiming to elucidate the relationship among facial pattern, cortical thickness condylar and condylar translation.

CBCT Evaluation of Condylar Changes in Class II Hyperdivergent Adult Patients Following Posterior Maxillary Intrusion Using Miniscrews/Miniplates—A Prospective Study

“…A significant and higher condylar translation has been noted in hyperdivergent patients compared to the hypodivergent group in the studies conducted by Giradot Jr et al and Poluha et al 22,23 Other authors such as Akan et al 24 and Erverdi et al 25 also added a posterior bite block for posterior intrusion and demonstrated significant mandibular counterclockwise rotation, by stimulating muscular response. However, they have used cephalometrics alone to substantiate their results.…”