The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2021 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Assessment of Sagittal Condylar Guidance with Protrusive Inter-occlusal Method, Panoramic Radiographs, and Lateral Cephalogram: A Comparative Study

Konark, Anju Singh, Cheranjeevi Jayam, Rohit Singh, Irfanul Huda, Aaysha T Nabi

Keywords : Condylar guidance, Lateral cephalogram, Panoramic radiographs

Citation Information : K, Singh A, Jayam C, Singh R, Huda I, Nabi AT. Assessment of Sagittal Condylar Guidance with Protrusive Inter-occlusal Method, Panoramic Radiographs, and Lateral Cephalogram: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (1):47-50.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2866

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 19-04-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Background: Condylar guidance can be determined using the clinical and radiographic methods. The present study was conducted to determine condylar guidance using the protrusive interocclusal wax method, panoramic radiographs, and lateral cephalogram. Aims: The aim of the study was to compare the correlation between sagittal condylar guidance with protrusive interocclusal method, panoramic radiographs, and lateral cephalogram. Materials and methods: The present study was conducted on 82 dentulous subjects (males 41, females 41). In all subjects, interocclusal registration values and condylar guidance values were measured using panoramic radiographs and lateral cephalograms. Results: The mean ± SD protrusive interocclusal registration value on the left side was 34.01 ± 1.2 mm and 34.08 ± 1.4 mm on the right side. The panoramic radiographs showed 35.12 ± 1.6 mm on the left side and 35.16 ± 1.7 mm on the right side. The mean ± SD protrusive interocclusal registration values on the left side was 34.01 ± 1.2 mm on the left side and 34.08 ± 1.4 mm on the right side. Lateral cephalogram showed 34.35 ± 1.3 mm on the left side and 34.67 ± 1.6 mm on the right side. There was a significant difference between the methods (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Sagittal condylar guidance can be evaluated using protrusive interocclusal method. Along with it, other methods such as panoramic radiographs and lateral cephalogram may also be used for recording condylar guidance. Clinical significance: Lateral cephalogram and panoramic radiographs may be reliable in determining condylar guidance, which can be used in orthodontic treatment planning.


PDF Share
  1. Sharma LA, Azhagarasan NS, Shankar C, et al. Comparative study of the effect of three different inter-occlusal recording materials and reproducibility of horizontal condylar registrations in two different semiadjustable articulators: a clinical study. Int J Prosthodont Restorative Dent 2011;1:155–162. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1029.
  2. Godavarthi A, Sajjan M, Raju A, et al. Correlation of condylar guidance determined by panoramic radiographs to one determined by conventional methods. J Int Oral Health 2015;7(8):123–128.
  3. Shahidi S, Adibi S, Vojdani M, et al. Comparison of condylar inclination attained by inter-occlusal records and radiographic tracing. J Isfahan Dent School 2012;8(2):117–125.
  4. Prajapati P, Sethuraman R, Naveen YG, et al. A clinical study of the variation in horizontal condylar guidance obtained by using three anterior points of reference and two different articulator systems. Contemp Clin Dent 2013;4:162–169. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X. 114859.
  5. Tannamala PK, Pulagam M, Pottem SR, et al. Condylar guidance: correlation between protrusive interocclusal record and panoramic radiographic image: a pilot study. J Prosthodont 2012;21:181–184. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00811.x.
  6. Thakur M, Jain V, Parkash H, et al. A comparative evaluation of staticand functional methods for recording centric relation and condylar guidance: a clinical study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2012;12:175–181. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-012-0154-5.
  7. Shetty S, Satish Babu CL, Tambake D, et al. A comparative evaluation of condylar guidance value from radiograph with interocclusal records made during jaw relation and try-in: a pilot study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2013;13:321–326. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-013-0284-4.
  8. Aull AE. Condylar determinants of occlusal patterns. J Prosthet Dent 1965;15:826–849. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(65)90122-8.
  9. Prasad KD, Shah N, Hegde C. A clinico-radiographic analysis of sagittal condylar guidance determined by protrusive interocclusal registration and panoramic radiographic images in humans. Contemp Clin Dent 2012;3:383–387. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.107419.
  10. Boos RH. Condylar path by roentgenograph. J Prosthet Dent 1951;1:387–392. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(51)90022-4.
  11. Shreshta P, Jain V, Bhalla A, et al. A comparative study to measure the condylar guidance by the radiographic and clinical methods. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4:153–157. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2012.4.3.153.
  12. Galagali G, Kalekhan SM, Nidawani P, et al. Comparative analysis of sagittal condylar guidance by protrusive interocclusal records with panoramic and lateral cephalogram radiographs in dentulous population: a clinico-radiographic study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16:148–153. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.179322.
  13. Davis DN, Mackay F. Reliability of cephalometric analysis using manual and interactive computer methods. Br J Orthod 1991;18:105–109. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.18.2.105.
  14. Bhandari A, Manandhar A, Singh RK, et al. A comparative study to measure the horizontal condylar guidance obtained by protrusive interocclusal records and panoramic radiographic images in completely edentulous patients. JCMS Nepal 2018;14(1):21–27. DOI: 10.3126/jcmsn.v14i1.18947.
  15. Salemi F, Heidari B, Shokri A, et al. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography and panoramic imaging in determining condylar ramp in comparison to inter-occlusal protrusive record. Int J Pharm Technol 2017;9(1):28122–28131.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.