Table 5 Displacement of condyle (short-term)
From: Effect of protraction facemask on the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review
Author | Outcome | Short-term effect |
|---|---|---|
Mandall (2010, 2012) | Cephalometric Analysis: prevalence of forward mandibular displacement on closure | 70.3% have a forward mandibular displacement in control group (baseline: 52.6%); 21.9% have a forward mandibular displacement in PFM group (baseline: 52.9%). |
Gallagher (1998) | Cephalometric Analysis: the direction of condylion movement | Condylion moved inferiorly and posteriorly in PFM group; No significant difference between PFM group and control group. |
EI (2010) | MPI method: the direction of condyle movement, the discrepancies between the CR and MI positions | Condyle moved superiorly and posteriorly in PFM group; The discrepancies between the CR and MI positions decreased more in DFM group than in GFM group. |
Gong (2014) | CT: anterior joint space, superior joint space, posterior joint space, glenoid fossa depth | No significant increment of the anterior joint space and glenoid fossa depth; Significant decrement of the superior joint space and posterior joint space. |
Yao (2001) | Bilateral X-ray films of Schuller’s position: anterior joint space, superior joint space, posterior joint space, TMJ spaces area | Significant increment of the anterior joint space and the anterior joint spaces area; Significant decrement of the posterior joint space and the posterior joint spaces area; No significant increment of the superior joint space |
Lee (2016) | CBCT: displacement of condyle, coronoid process, and ramus; glenoid fossa changes | Condyle showed displacement to the outside, backward, and upward; coronoid process, and ramus showed displacement to the outside. |