Skip to main content

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.
  1. CT computed tomograph, CBCT cone beam computed tomograph, MPI mandibular position indicator