Comparative evaluation of sagittal condylar guidance obtained from a clinical method and with cone beam computed tomography in dentate individuals.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Programming semiadjustable and fully adjustable articulators involves time-consuming clinical steps which can be avoided if an accurate radiographic method can accurately determine the condylar guidance angles.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the sagittal condylar guidance in dentate individuals as determined by a clinical method, protrusive interocclusal record, and a radiographic method, cone beam computed tomography. If the methods show a correlation, then cone beam computed tomography can be used as a time-saving method of programming an articulator for patients requiring a cone beam computed tomography scan.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 40 participants (20 men and 20 women) within the 20 to 40 years age group were enrolled according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Cone beam computed tomography scans were obtained, and by using an appropriate software program, the sagittal condylar guidance was measured for both sides. A protrusive interocclusal record was obtained by using polyvinyl siloxane material. The maxillary cast of each participant was mounted on a semiadjustable articulator with a facebow transfer, and the mandibular cast was mounted with a maximum intercuspal record. The protrusive record was then transferred to the articulator for programming.

RESULTS

The right and left sagittal condylar guidance values obtained from both the protrusive interocclusal record and cone beam computed tomography method were comparable, with no significant differences (P>.05). The difference in condylar inclination values for both sexes obtained from both methods for both sides were not statistically different (P>.05). With increasing age, condylar inclination values obtained from both methods tended to decrease. The values for sagittal condylar guidance obtained from both methods (protrusive interocclusal record and cone beam computed tomography) were comparable and correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

Cone beam computed tomography measurement involves stable bony landmarks and can be standardized, whereas clinical methods are time consuming and can provide inaccurate results because of the instability of the materials used to register the maxillomandibular relationship. Thus, cone beam computed tomography can be used to obtain the sagittal horizontal guidance for programming semiadjustable and fully adjustable articulators for patients requiring a cone beam computed tomography scan.