Tetrafid mandibular condyle: a unique case report and review of the literature

Şahman, Halil; Etöz, Osman A.; Sekerci, Ahmet-Ercan; Etöz, Meryem; Şişman, Yıldıray

doi:10.1259/dmfr/62082661

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…BMC is a rare anomaly that was first described by Hrdlicka in 1941 ( 79 ) and it is radiographycally characterized by a duplication of the mandibular condyle due to a groove of variable depth ( 13 , 14 , 29 , 45 ). Interestingly, trifid ( 13 , 27 , 55 , 65 ) and tetrafid ( 60 ) condyles have also been described.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bifid mandibular condyles: A systematic review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBifid mandibular condyle (BMC) constitutes an extremely rare disorder characterized by a duplication of the head of the mandibular condyle. Its prevalence ranges from 0.31% to 1.82% in the published literature.ObjectivesThe primary objective was to describe the main etiological, clinical and radiological characteristics of patients with BMCs and the existent treatment options. The secondary objective was to simultaneously include the characteristics of two new cases of BMC.Material and MethodsAn electronic search in Pubmed (MEDLINE), Scopus and The Cochrane Library was carried out by two independent reviewers until April 2018. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies, case series and case reports describing clinical and/or radiological characteristics of patients with BMC were included. Registered variables were demographic, etiological factors, diagnostic exam, clinical characteristics and treatment options. The results from the articles selected were organized in a Table along with the characteristics of two new cases of BMC provided by the authors.ResultsFrom a total of 431 articles found in the initial search, 68 articles were finally included. This systematic review included 216 patients and 270 BMC with an average age of 30.6 (SD=14.7) years and a women:men ratio of 1.4:1. Mediolateral condylar orientation was the most prevalent position (80.1%). Among cases with known etiology, 40.8% of cases had a history of traumatism, while 55.9% did not present any relevant medical background. Half of the symptomatic cases had history of trauma. The most common symptoms were hypomobility (22.7%), arthralgia (18.1%), articular noise (17.2%) and ankylosis (17.6%). Active monitoring and manufacturing an occlusal splint were the most frequent treatment options.ConclusionsBMC may have congenital or traumatic etiology. Hypomobility and arthralgia are the most frequent symptoms and treatment options are often conservative. Key words:Bifid mandibular condyle, trifid condyle, tetrafid condyle, condylar orientation, ankyloses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bifid mandibular condyles: A systematic review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Congenital deformities and developmental abnormalities of the mandibular condyle are classified as (1) hypoplasia or aplasia; (2) hyperplasia; and (3) bifidity. [ 1 ] Bifidity reports are scanty in literature, whereas trifid[ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] and tetrafid[ 9 ] reports are extremely rare. The current classification does not accommodate condyles with trifid/tetrafid cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilateral condylar anomaly: A case report and review

Prasanna

Setty

Udupa

et al. 2015

J Oral Maxillofac Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because most bifid condyles are asymptomatic, treatment is not pursued except in cases with ankylosis after bone fracture [7,13,14,19,21]. Bifid condyles are often found incidentally on CT scan; there are no reports of treatment of bifid condyles without ankylosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since Hrdlička first reported the condition in skull specimens in 1941, there have been 50 reports concerning bifid mandibular condyles [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. The degree of condylar head separation is variable, with some cases having only a 1-2-mm indentation in the condylar head, while others have complete separation of the heads.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%