Hyoid Bone Position in Patients with and without Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthrosis: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and Cephalometric Analysis

Abstract

Objective. To assess the differences in hyoid bone position in patients with and without temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis (TMJOA). Methods. The present cross-sectional study was conducted in 427 participants whose osseous status was evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography and classified into normal, indeterminate osteoarthrosis (OA), and OA. The hyoid bone position and craniofacial characteristics were evaluated using cephalograms. Patients were divided into the normal group (N = 89), indeterminate OA group (N = 182), and OA group (N = 156). Descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance, and age- and sex-based stratified analyses were performed. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. The differences in Hy to MP, Hy-RGn, Hy to C3-RGn, C3-RGn, and Go-Hy-Me among the three groups were statistically significant. The differences in the Frankfort-mandibular plane angle, saddle angle, articular angle, gonial angle, ramus height, and posterior facial height were statistically significant. After adjusting age and sex, the Hy-RGn and C3-RGn in the normal group were significantly greater than the OA group. No statistical differences were observed in the hyoid measurements in the stratified analyses in males or subjects less than 18 years old. The differences in Hy to MP, Hy to C3-RGn, and Go-Hy-Me in female patients among the three groups were statistically significant. The differences in Hy to SN, Hy to FH, Hy to PP, Hy to MP, Hy-RGn, Hy-C3, Hy to C3-RGn, Go-Hy-Me, Hy-S, and C3-Hy-S in adults were statistically significant. Conclusion. The differences in the hyoid bone position, mainly relative to the mandible, were statistically significant in patients with or without TMJOA. The difference pattern varied among different age and sex groups. Clinical evaluation of the hyoid position must consider the age and sex of patients. Longitudinal studies are required to clarify the causal relationship between TMJOA and hyoid bone position.

Association of temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis with dentoskeletal morphology in males: A cone‐beam computed tomography and cephalometric analysis

“…In stratified analysis based on skeletal pattern, more obvious differences between patients with and without TMJOA were also apparent in skeletal Class II patients compared to patients with other skeletal patterns. The subjects in the normal group were slightly younger than those in the other two groups, and the normal group had the largest percentage of adolescents, which was consistent with other studies 3,11 . The age difference among groups may due to age‐related changes in the condyles, which condylar osseous abnormities are more common and severe in elders 17,18 .…”

“…Similar craniofacial features were found in female adolescents 12 . But compared with female adults, female adolescents showed a weaker correlation between dentoskeletal morphology and TMJOA 11 . Skeletal pattern was significantly associated with TMJOA 13,14 .…”

Position of the Hyoid Bone and Dimension of Nasopharynx and Oropharynx after Occlusal Splint Therapy and Physiotherapy in Patients Diagnosed with Temporomandibular Disorders

“…The relationship between TMD and hyoid bone position has been investigated by several authors. Zhou et al [ 16 ] analyzed the position of the hyoid bone in three groups: normal group (patients with normal morphology of the mandibular condyles), indeterminate for osteoarthrosis (condyles diagnosed with articular surface flattening or subcortical sclerosis, and at the time without any other symptoms), and finally, patients with osteoarthrosis (OA). The authors noticed that the hyoid bone was positioned closer to the cranium and mandible in adult patients with TMJ OA.…”

Do Temporomandibular Disorder Patients with Joint Pain Exhibit Forward Head Posture? A Cephalometric Study

“…Two blinded researchers performed the cephalometric analysis, and the intra- and interobserver reliability on cephalogram tracing was tested as previous described [ 16 , 22 ]. No statistical differences between the two measurements of each researcher and between the measurements of two researchers were observed, and all intraclass correlation coefficients were >0.80 [ 23 , 24 ].…”