Temporomandibular Joint Gape Angles in Normal and Painful Domestic Felines

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the gape angles (temporomandibular joint range of motion with mouth opening) of conscious and anesthetized domestic felines and to compare gape angles with and without evidence of oral pain. This prospective study evaluated the gape angle of 58 domestic felines. The cats were grouped into painful ( n = 33) and nonpainful cohorts ( n = 25) and gape angles were compared during conscious and anesthetized conditions. Gape angles were determined based on measurements of the maximal interincisal distance and lengths of the mandible and maxilla followed by calculation of the law of cosines. The mean feline gape angle (standard deviation) was determined to be 45.3° (8.6°) and 50.8° (6.2°) for conscious and anesthetized felines respectively. There was no significant difference between painful and non-painful feline gape angles during conscious ( P = .613) or anesthetized ( P = .605) evaluations. There was a significant difference between anesthetized and conscious gape angles ( P < .001) for both painful and non-painful cohorts. This study determined the standardized, normal feline temporomandibular joint (TMJ) gape angle in both conscious and anesthetized states. This study suggests that the feline gape angle is not a useful indicator of oral pain. By determining the feline gape angle, which was previously unknown, further evaluation of its utility as a non-invasive clinical parameter for evaluation of restrictive TMJ motions as well as its use for serial evaluations may be pursued.

Kinematic performance of a novel temporomandibular joint replacement prosthesis under bite-force conditions in dogs and cats

“…A range of motion was achieved larger than in vivo jaw-opening motion, indicating that TMJR would not restrict mouth opening. [30][31][32] Similar to other maxillofacial applications, the principles of internal fixation set by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen were used to secure the TMJR implants. 33,34 Motions of the mandible relative to the temporal bone were numerically very similar between intact TMJ, UniTMJR, and BiTMJR.…”