+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Mandibular asymmetry and condylar position in children with unilateral posterior crossbite



Mandibular asymmetry and condylar position in children with unilateral posterior crossbite



American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 115(5): 569-575



The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine if condylar position in children with functional unilateral crossbites was different from that found in children with Class I noncrossbite malocclusions and if there was a change in condylar position after correction of the crossbite by palatal expansion. Mandibular asymmetry in children with functional unilateral posterior crossbite was also compared to that of a Class I noncrossbite group. Thirty-one children aged 6 to 14 years (mean, 9.3 years; standard deviation, 2.2) with functional unilateral crossbites were compared to 31 children aged 9.5 to 14.1 years (mean, 11.9 years; standard deviation, 1.3) exhibiting Angle Class I noncrossbite malocclusions. Pretreatment submentovertex radiographs were used to study mandibular skeletal, dental, and positional asymmetries with reference to cranial floor and mandibular coordinate systems. In addition, the anterior, superior, and posterior joint spaces were measured to determine differences between the groups with the use of pretreatment and posttreatment horizontally corrected tomograms of the temporomandibular joints. Finally, the distances of the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first molar relative to the buccal groove of the lower first molar were measured in both groups before treatment. Univariate analyses revealed that the mandibles of children in the functional unilateral posterior crossbite group exhibited asymmetry in both anteroposterior and transverse dimensions when compared with the Class I noncrossbite group (P <. 05). These asymmetries were the result of a functional deviation of the mandible that was present in all subjects in the crossbite group. This deviation was manifested occlusally by a Class II subdivision on the crossbite side as indicated from the study model analysis (P <.05). Examination of condylar position as evidenced by horizontally corrected tomograms demonstrated a large standard deviation, resulting in an inability to detect any significant differences within or between groups at both T1 and T2 (P >.05). This study raised the question of the appropriateness of measuring joint spaces for routine diagnostic purposes.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 046619701

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 10229892

DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70282-9


Related references

Condylar asymmetry in unilateral posterior crossbite patients. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 133(3): 382-387, 2008

Effect of unilateral posterior crossbite and unilateral cleft lip and palate on vertical mandibular asymmetry. Irish Journal of Medical Science 183(3): 357-362, 2014

An evaluation of mandibular asymmetry in adults with unilateral posterior crossbite. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 107(4): 394-400, 1995

Condylar and ramal vertical asymmetry in unilateral and bilateral posterior crossbite patients and a normal occlusion sample. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 136(1): 37-43, 2009

Nonsurgical treatment of an adult with mandibular asymmetry and unilateral posterior crossbite. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 135(1): 118-126, 2009

Relationship between unilateral posterior crossbite and mandibular asymmetry during late adolescence. Stomatologija 20(3): 90-95, 2018

Transverse maxillary arch form and mandibular asymmetry in patients with posterior unilateral crossbite. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 140(6): 828-838, 2011

An evaluation of condylar and ramal vertical asymmetry in adolescents with unilateral and bilateral posterior crossbite using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Australian Orthodontic Journal 30(1): 11-18, 2014

Comparison of the mandibular hinge axis in adult patients with facial asymmetry with and without posterior unilateral crossbite. European Journal of Orthodontics 37(1): 22-27, 2015

Mandibular asymmetry in unilateral and bilateral posterior crossbite patients using cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthodontist 81(6): 966-974, 2011

Condylar position in children with functional posterior crossbites: before and after crossbite correction. Pediatric Dentistry 2(3): 190-194, 1980

Evaluation of mandibular condyles in children with unilateral posterior crossbite. Brazilian Oral Research 29: 49, 2015

Condylar asymmetry in bilateral posterior crossbite patients. Angle Orthodontist 77(1): 77-81, 2007

Is there an asymmetry of the condylar and coronoid processes of the mandible in individuals with unilateral crossbite?. Angle Orthodontist 89(3): 464-469, 2019

Temporomandibular joint disc position and configuration in children with functional unilateral posterior crossbite: a magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 129(6): 785-793, 2006