Identification of condylar anatomy affects the evaluation of mandibular growth: guidelines for accurate reporting and research.
Mandibular length is measured on cephalographs to depict changes during growth and after orthodontic treatment, and is often defined between condylion (Co, most posterior superior point on the condylar outline) and pogonion (Pog, most anterior point on the chin). The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of identifying condylar anatomy, thus the validity of using Co-Pog to evaluate mandibular growth. The sample included 34 children from a prospective study on the early treatment of distoclusions. Two lateral head films were taken of each child, the first with the mouth closed (MC), the second with the mouth open (MO). Three examiners, two orthodontists (U.H. and K.H.) and a dental radiologist (R.B.), rated the condyle as identifiable, nonidentifiable, and interpreted. The rating was applied to the left (L) and right (R) condyles, or to only one outline (O) when the R and L structures appeared superimposed and were not distinguished separately. Besides Co-Pog, the orthodontists traced sella-nasion (SN) and incisor tip-menton (I-Me) to evaluate variability in measurements that do not include Co. One operator (J.G.) measured all distances. Agreement among the three examiners was best in rating the MO radiographs (50%): 4.1% identifiable, 5.9% nonidentifiable or interpreted; in the MC films, they agreed in 32.3% of the cases, but only one of the ratings was identifiable (2.9%). The highest agreement was in identifying the left condyle on the MO film (35.3%). Intraclass correlation coefficients for CO-Pog ranged from r = 0.73 (L side) to r = 0.92 (O) for one orthodontist, and for the other from r = 0.76 (O) to r = 0.85 (L). Both orthodontists had high correlations for SN and I-Me between MC and MO (0.94 < r < 0.98). The variability between examiners in recognizing condylar anatomy, particularly on radiographs taken with the mouth closed, suggests that the identification of condylar anatomy must be rated in studies of mandibular growth. Researchers measuring mandibular length in investigations of mandibular growth after orthodontic therapy should differentiate between cases where the condyle is readily identified, and those where condylar anatomy is interpreted.
Ghafari
J
J
Department of Orthodontics School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104-6003, USA.
Jacobsson-Hunt
U
U
Higgins-Barber
K
K
Beideman
R W
RW
Shofer
F S
FS
Laster
L L
LL
D002508:Cephalometry; D002648:Child; D002680:Chin / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development; D018865:Dental Research; D017408:Guidelines as Topic; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence; D007180:Incisor / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development; D008310:Malocclusion / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy; D008334:Mandible / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development*; D008335:Mandibular Condyle / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development; D009666:Nose / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development; D015588:Observer Variation; D009971:Orthodontics, Corrective; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011859:Radiography; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012658:Sella Turcica / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000254:growth & development