Relationship Between Attachment of the Superficial Masseter Muscle and Craniofacial Morphology in Dentate and Edentulous Humans

Abstract

Previous studies have described the importance of the interaction between the masticatory muscles and the craniofacial skeleton in the control of craniofacial growth. This study describes the attachment and orientation of the superficial masseter muscle and its relationship with craniofacial morphology in dentate and edentulous subjects. Data were obtained from lateral cephalometric radiographs of a total of 31 cadavers in which the superficial masseter muscle had been defined with liquid barium. The results provide evidence that the morphology of the superficial masseter muscle in the gonion region differed significantly between dentate and edentulous subjects, with the masseter being 2.7 mm wider and the gonion-anterior muscle border distance being 4.0 mm greater in dentate subjects. The complex relationship between craniofacial morphology and the dimensions and inclination of the superficial masseter muscle were most clearly evident in dentate subjects where the position of the anterior border was related to ramus dimensions and mandibular and occlusal plane angles. The association is much less clear in edentulous subjects where normal function was disturbed. In general, age was not a significant determinant of variation in superficial masseter muscle dimensions and orientation.

Mandibular morphology in two archaeological human skeletal samples from northwest Europe with different masticatory regimes

“…Low mandibular angle has been associated with increased bite force (Ingervall and Helkimo, 1978;Kiliaridis et al, 1995;Raadsheer et al, 1999;Ringqvist, 1973;Sondang et al, 2003;Throckmorton et al, 2000), and greater development of masticatory musculature (Bennington et al, 1999;Bloem and van Hoof, 1971;Gelbke, 1958;Gionhaku and Lowe, 1989;Kasai et al, 1994Kasai et al, , 1997, although some studies have failed to identify such relationships (Charalampidou et al, 2008;Hannam and Wood, 1989;Ingervall and Thilander, 1974;Kitai et al, 2002;Kubota et al, 1998;van Spronson et al, 1991;Watanabe and Watanabe, 2001;Weijs and Hillen, 1986). Gionhaku and Lowe (1989), Kasai et al (1994), Kubota et al (1998) and Bennington et al (1999) associated greater height of the mandibular ramus with increased masticatory muscular development, but Hannam and Wood (1989) and van Spronson et al (1991) failed to detect an association. Maximum bite force was positively associated with ramus height in the studies of Ringqvist (1973), Ingervall and Helkimo (1978) and Raadsheer et al (1999), but not by Ingervall and Thilander (1974), Hannam and Wood (1989) or Watanabe and Watanabe (2001).…”

Effects of Edentulism on Mandibular Morphology: Evaluation of Panoramic Radiographs

“…According to the mandibular morphology, GA dimensions can change with age, tooth loss, and denture use [12]. GA size has shown to be related to the development of masticatory muscles [13]. The resulting upward curving of the inferior border of the mandible anterior to the angular process (gonion) is known as the antegonial notch [10].…”

Relationship between maxillofacial morphology and morphological characteristics of vertical sections of the mandible obtained by CT scanning.

“…In particular, there are many reports on the relationship between the masseter muscle and craniofacial morphology [1][2][3][4][5][6][7].…”