Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Temporomandibular Eklemin Transkraniyal Görüntülenmesinde Farklı Açılamaların Değerlendirilmesi: İn Vitro Çalışma

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 3, 532 - 539, 25.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1245841

Öz

Amaç: Temporomandibular eklem, baş bölgesinde hareketli olan tek eklemdir. Temporomandibular eklem radyolojik incelemelerinde görülmesi istenen dokular; kondil, glenoid fossa, eklem diski ve komşu yumuşak dokulardır. Bunları değerlendirmek için farklı yöntemler uygulanır. Çalışmamızın amacı, temporomandibular eklemin lateral transkraniyal radyografik yöntem ile görüntülenmesinde en ideal açılamanın değerlendirilmesidir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Kafa modelde sol temporomandibular eklem bölgesi üzerinde çalışıldı. Kondil başı ve artiküler fossaya belirteç olarak gutta perka parçaları yerleştirildi. Kafa model üzerindeki belirteçler arası mesafeler dijital kumpas ile ölçülerek yedi farklı parametrenin gerçek boyutları belirlendi. Periapikal röntgen cihazı kullanılarak sol temporomandibular eklem bölgesinden vertikalde 3, horizontalde 5 farklı açı kombinasyonu sonucunda 15 farklı açılama altında radyograflar elde edildi. Çalışma süresince yapılan ölçümler sonucunda elde edilen veriler Windows ortamında SPSS (SPSS Statistics 17.0, Chicago, USA) kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Alınan radyograflar üzerindeki parametre boyutları istatistiksel olarak Two-way Anova testi kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir (p˂0.05). Elde edilen verilerin homojen dağılıp dağılmadığı Kolmogorov-Smirnov ve Shapiro-Wilk testi ile değerledirilmiş olup, verilerin normal dağılım gösterdiği bulunmuştur. Bütün açılamalar değerlendirildiğinde Metapacs Viewer ve İmage J ölçüm yöntemleri arasında anlamlı fark olmadığı gözlenmiştir (p>0,05).
Sonuç: Tüm parametreler birlikte değerlendirildiği zaman gerçek boyuta en uzak açılama: 25V +20H olarak, en ideal açılamalar ise: 20V -20H ve 25V -10H olarak belirlenmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: İn vitro, Radyografi, Temporomandibular eklem.

Destekleyen Kurum

Selçuk Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinatörlüğü

Proje Numarası

14102022

Kaynakça

  • 1. Harorlı A. Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri; 2014.
  • 2. Yalçın S, Aktaş İ. Dişhekimliğinde Temporomandibular Eklem Hastalarına Yaklaşım: Vestiyer Yayın Grubu; 2010.
  • 3. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology: Principles and Interpretation. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elseiver; 2009.
  • 4. Bag AK, Gaddikeri S, Singhal A, Hardin S, Tran BD, Medina JA, Cure JK. Imaging of the temporomandibular joint: An update. World J Radiol 2014; 6(8): 567-582.
  • 5. Serra MD, Gaviao MB. Evaluation of condylar position from transcranial projections in primary dentition. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 110-116.
  • 6. Incesu L, Taskaya-Yılmaz N,Ogutcen-Toller M, Uzun E. Relationship of condylar position to disc position and morphology. Eur J Radiol 2004; 51: 269-273.
  • 7. Usumez S, Oz F, Guray E. Comparison of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging diagnoses in patients with TMD history. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 52-56.
  • 8. Ren YF, Isberg A, Westesson PL. Condyle position in the temporomandibular joint. Comparison between asymptomatic volunteers with normal disk position and patients with disk displacement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80: 101-107.
  • 9. Ozawa S, Boering G, Kawata T, Tanimoto K, Tanne K. Reconsideration of the TMJ condylar position during internal derangement: comparison between condylar position on tomogram and degree of disk displacement on MRI. Cranio 1999; 17:93-100.
  • 10. Kurita H, Ohtsuka A, Kobayashi H, Kurashina K. A study of the relationship between the position of the condylar head and displacement of the temporomandibular joint disk. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001; 30: 162-165.
  • 11. Gateno J, Anderson PB, Xia JJ, Horng JC, Teichgraeber JF, Liebschner MA. A comparative assessment of mandibular condylar position in patients with anterior disc displacement of the temporomandibular joint. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004; 62: 39-43.
  • 12. Weinberg LA. Role of condylar position in TMJ dysfunction-pain syndrome. J Prosthet Dent 1979; 41: 636-643.
  • 13. Berry HM, Chick FA. Temporomandibular joint: interpretation of radiographs. Dent Pract 1956; 7: 18-24.
  • 14. Eckerdal O, Lundberg M. Periodic roentgenography of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1975; 4: 4-11.
  • 15. Aquilino SA, Matteson SR, Holland GA, Philips C. Evaluation of condylar position from temporomandibular joint radiographs. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53: 88-97.
  • 16. Preti G, Fava C. Lateral transcranial radiography of the temporomandibular joint. Part I: Validity in skulls and patients. J Prosthet Dent 1988; 59: 85-93.
  • 17. Larheim TA, Johanessen S. Transpharyngeal radiography of mandibular condyle. Comparision with other conventional methods. Acta Radiolagica Diagnostica 1985; 26: 167.
  • 18. Habets MH, Bezuur JN, Lopez VJ, Hansson TL. The OPG: an aid in TMJ diagnostics III: A comparison between lateral tomography and dental rotational panoramic radiography (orthopantomography). Journal of Oral Rehabilition 1989; 16: 401.
  • 19. Brooks SL, Lanzetta ML. Absorbed doses from temporomandibular joint radiography. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology 1985; 59: 647.
  • 20. Gray RJM, Quayle AA, Horner K. The effects of positioning variations in transcranial radiographs of the temporomandibular joint: a laboratory study. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1991; 29: 241-249.

The Evaluating Varied Angles in Transcranial Imaging of the Temporomandibular Joint: in vitro study

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 3, 532 - 539, 25.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1245841

Öz

Background: Temporomandibular joint is the only movable joint in the head region. Tissues to be seen in temporomandibular joint radiological examinations; condyle, glenoid fossa, articular disc and adjacent soft tissues. Different methods are used to evaluate them. The aim of our study is to evaluate optimum angle in transcranial imaging of the temporomandibular joint.
Methods: The study have been made in left temporomandibular joint region on the skull. Gutta percha pieces have been placed on condylar head and articular fossa as markers. The actual size of seven different parameters were determined with measuring the distance between the markers on the skull with digital calipers. Radiographs were taken with 15 different angles from left temporomandibular joint region by using periapical X-ray device. 15 varied angles were obtained as a result of 3 in vertical, 5 in horizontal different angles combination. The data obtained from the measurements taken during the study was evaluated by using SPSS (SPSS Statistics 17.0, Chicago, USA) on Windows.
Results: Parameter sizes on the radiographs were evaluated by using statistical Two-way Anova tests (p˂0.05). The obtained data if homogeneously dispersed or not was evaluated by Kolmogorov-Smirnov ve Shapiro-Wilk test and it was found that normal distribution of data. When all the angles evaluated, there were no significant differences between Metapacs Viewer and Image J measurement methods (p>0,05).
Conclusion: When all parameters are considered together, farthest angle from the actual size: 25V +20H, optimum angles: 20V -20H and 25V -10H were determined.
Keywords: In vitro, Radiography, Temporomandibular joint.

Proje Numarası

14102022

Kaynakça

  • 1. Harorlı A. Ağız, Diş ve Çene Radyolojisi: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri; 2014.
  • 2. Yalçın S, Aktaş İ. Dişhekimliğinde Temporomandibular Eklem Hastalarına Yaklaşım: Vestiyer Yayın Grubu; 2010.
  • 3. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral Radiology: Principles and Interpretation. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elseiver; 2009.
  • 4. Bag AK, Gaddikeri S, Singhal A, Hardin S, Tran BD, Medina JA, Cure JK. Imaging of the temporomandibular joint: An update. World J Radiol 2014; 6(8): 567-582.
  • 5. Serra MD, Gaviao MB. Evaluation of condylar position from transcranial projections in primary dentition. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006; 35: 110-116.
  • 6. Incesu L, Taskaya-Yılmaz N,Ogutcen-Toller M, Uzun E. Relationship of condylar position to disc position and morphology. Eur J Radiol 2004; 51: 269-273.
  • 7. Usumez S, Oz F, Guray E. Comparison of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging diagnoses in patients with TMD history. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 52-56.
  • 8. Ren YF, Isberg A, Westesson PL. Condyle position in the temporomandibular joint. Comparison between asymptomatic volunteers with normal disk position and patients with disk displacement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80: 101-107.
  • 9. Ozawa S, Boering G, Kawata T, Tanimoto K, Tanne K. Reconsideration of the TMJ condylar position during internal derangement: comparison between condylar position on tomogram and degree of disk displacement on MRI. Cranio 1999; 17:93-100.
  • 10. Kurita H, Ohtsuka A, Kobayashi H, Kurashina K. A study of the relationship between the position of the condylar head and displacement of the temporomandibular joint disk. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001; 30: 162-165.
  • 11. Gateno J, Anderson PB, Xia JJ, Horng JC, Teichgraeber JF, Liebschner MA. A comparative assessment of mandibular condylar position in patients with anterior disc displacement of the temporomandibular joint. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004; 62: 39-43.
  • 12. Weinberg LA. Role of condylar position in TMJ dysfunction-pain syndrome. J Prosthet Dent 1979; 41: 636-643.
  • 13. Berry HM, Chick FA. Temporomandibular joint: interpretation of radiographs. Dent Pract 1956; 7: 18-24.
  • 14. Eckerdal O, Lundberg M. Periodic roentgenography of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1975; 4: 4-11.
  • 15. Aquilino SA, Matteson SR, Holland GA, Philips C. Evaluation of condylar position from temporomandibular joint radiographs. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53: 88-97.
  • 16. Preti G, Fava C. Lateral transcranial radiography of the temporomandibular joint. Part I: Validity in skulls and patients. J Prosthet Dent 1988; 59: 85-93.
  • 17. Larheim TA, Johanessen S. Transpharyngeal radiography of mandibular condyle. Comparision with other conventional methods. Acta Radiolagica Diagnostica 1985; 26: 167.
  • 18. Habets MH, Bezuur JN, Lopez VJ, Hansson TL. The OPG: an aid in TMJ diagnostics III: A comparison between lateral tomography and dental rotational panoramic radiography (orthopantomography). Journal of Oral Rehabilition 1989; 16: 401.
  • 19. Brooks SL, Lanzetta ML. Absorbed doses from temporomandibular joint radiography. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology 1985; 59: 647.
  • 20. Gray RJM, Quayle AA, Horner K. The effects of positioning variations in transcranial radiographs of the temporomandibular joint: a laboratory study. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1991; 29: 241-249.
Toplam 20 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Diş Hekimliği
Bölüm Araştırma
Yazarlar

Kadir Kaplanoğlu 0000-0002-0214-5217

Faruk Akgünlü 0000-0002-3427-1381

Proje Numarası 14102022
Yayımlanma Tarihi 25 Aralık 2023
Gönderilme Tarihi 1 Şubat 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

Vancouver Kaplanoğlu K, Akgünlü F. Temporomandibular Eklemin Transkraniyal Görüntülenmesinde Farklı Açılamaların Değerlendirilmesi: İn Vitro Çalışma. Selcuk Dent J. 2023;10(3):532-9.