Reproducibility of Centric Relation Techniques by means of Condyle Position Analysis

Galeković, Nikolina Holen; Fugošić, Vesna; Braut, Vedrana; Ćelić, Robert

doi:10.15644/asc51/1/2

Cited by 11 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is probably because the “power centric” method was developed to record condylar position on the day of registration. The method's repeatability has been previously documented [ 13 , 29 , 30 ]. However, in the event of occlusive interference, an incorrect mandibular closing pattern may persist in order to avoid excessive occlusive forces on the teeth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation

Radej

Szarmach

2022

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. This study is aimed at evaluating the impact of the craniofacial structure and occlusal conditions on the position of the articular heads of the mandibular condyles in the maximum intercuspal position (MIP) and comparing the centric relation (CR) and MIP of the mandibular condyles prior to orthodontic treatment. Methods. The studied group consisted of 33 women and 15 men (median age of 17.75 years). Contact points of opposing teeth in the MIP were assessed by hand-held casts. Condylar displacement (CD) in three spatial planes on both sides was measured on models mounted in an articulator using a mandibular position indicator (MPI). Patients were divided into groups according to craniofacial structures (vertical and horizontal growth directions). The Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, post hoc Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner, and Pearson’s χ 2 independence tests as well as Spearman’s nonparametric correlations were used in the statistical analyses. Results. Within the limitations of this study, no statistically significant correlation of CD with certain cephalometric measurements from a lateral cephalometric radiograph (ANB, SN-ML, and SGo/NMe) was observed. Correlation, however, was found between condylar displacement in the transverse axis and the mandibular plane angle SN-ML ( p = 0.033 ) and also between condylar displacement in the anteroposterior axis and a midline shift of the mandible ( p = 0.041 ). The results revealed a relationship between Angle’s classification of molar position on the right side and anteroposterior CD values ( p = 0.006 ). Conclusions. Cephalometric measurements cannot be used to predict CD at the level of the condyles. Analysis of occlusal conditions of models mounted in an articulator is desirable for patients with Angle’s class I and lower jaw asymmetry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation

Radej

Szarmach

2022

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[13][14][15][16][17][18] ►Tables 3 and 4 show the data collected from the six articles included in this systematic review. [7][8][9][10][11][12] None of the six included studies evaluated edentulous individuals. Therefore, the six articles included evaluated individuals with complete dentition (►Table 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Techniques for Obtaining Centric Relation Based on the Reproducibility of the Condylar Positions in Centric Relation—A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this systematic review was to compare centric relation (CR) techniques that belong to the same method of obtaining CR (guided, graphical, or physiological method), to verify which CR technique within each method of obtaining CR generates the greatest reproducibility of the condylar positions (or mandibular position) in CR. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published up to May 5, 2021. The search terms were combinations of “dental centric relation” (MeSH), with each of the following terms (individually): “reproducibility of findings” (MeSH); “jaw relation record” (MeSH); “chin point”; “gothic arch”; “bimanual manipulation”; “swallowing” (MeSH); and “jig.” Inclusion criteria: clinical studies in English; individuals without temporomandibular dysfunction and with complete or almost complete dentition or complete edentulous; and comparison between CR techniques belonging to the same method of obtaining CR based on the reproducibility of condylar positions in CR. For each method of obtaining the CR, the following CR techniques were considered: guided method (chin point guidance and bimanual manipulation); graphic method (intraoral and extraoral gothic arch tracing); and physiologic method (swallowing and tongue retrusion along the palate). A total of 1692 articles were screened. After the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, six articles were included in this review. None of the included studies evaluated edentulous individuals. All included articles compared CR techniques of the guided method. Three articles concluded that the bimanual technique showed greater reproducibility of the condylar positions in CR than the chin point guidance technique, two articles showed equivalence between these techniques, and 1 article concluded that the chin point guidance technique showed greater reproducibility of the condylar positions in CR than the bimanual technique. Thus, in this systematic review, the bimanual technique was often superior (generated greater reproducibility of the CR) or at least equivalent to the chin point guidance technique. Therefore, for individuals with complete dentition and without temporomandibular disorders, the bimanual technique is more recommended.

show abstract

“…Wood and Elliott[ 5 ] stated that Roth's technique of CR registration was the most accurate. Galeković et al [ 23 ] studied the reproducibility of three CR registration techniques, namely bimanual manipulation, chin point guidance, and Roth's method by means of condyle position analysis. In conclusion, they stated that all the three methods were reliable and could be performed in day-to-day clinical practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinical comparative study to assess the efficacy of a new centric registration technique with a conventional technique

Sushma

Roy

Sanyal

et al. 2019

J Indian Prosthodont Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim and objectives of this study were to assess and compare the efficacy of a new copyrighted technique (wax ball technique, L-77997/2018) and design (denture base design for the wax ball technique, L-78006/2018) for recording centric relation (CR). Settings and Designs: In vivo – comparative study. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted on sixty consented edentulous patients. The study participants were divided into Group I and Group II. CR in Group I patients was recorded using Dawson's bimanual technique (technique 1). For participants in Group II, CR was recorded using the authors’ copyrighted technique (technique 2). Time taken and accuracy of CR records by both the techniques were evaluated. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistics such as frequency and percentage were calculated for categorical variables, mean and standard deviation were calculated for quantitative variables. Independent t -test was used to compare the time taken to record the CR between the two groups. The accuracy of both the techniques was assessed by Mann–Whitney U-test. Results: The mean time taken for technique 1 was 56.47 s, whereas for technique 2, it was 5.97 s, with an overall mean difference of 50.5 s between the two techniques. Both techniques were found to be accurate, as the CR recorded during jaw relation matched with CR during trial in all the cases in both the groups (frequency 30 (N) and cumulative percentage 100%). Conclusion: From the study, it was found that, time taken for technique 2 was statistically less compared to that of technique 1, and both the techniques were found to be equally accurate.

show abstract

Reproducibility of Centric Relation Techniques by means of Condyle Position Analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 28 publications

The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation

The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation

Comparison of Techniques for Obtaining Centric Relation Based on the Reproducibility of the Condylar Positions in Centric Relation—A Systematic Review

A clinical comparative study to assess the efficacy of a new centric registration technique with a conventional technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About