Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2017, vol. 54, nr 1, January-March, p. 35–40

doi: 10.17219/dmp/65837

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Condylar guidance angles obtained from panoramic radiographic images: An evaluation of their reproducibility

Wartości kątów drogi stawowej uzyskiwane ze zdjęć pantomograficznych – ocena powtarzalności metody

Jolanta E. Loster1,A,B,C,D,F, Aneta Wieczorek1,B,F, Wojciech I. Ryniewicz1,A,C,E,F

1 Department of Dental Prosthetics, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland


Background. The method of using panoramic radiographic images to obtain numerical data on the condylar guidance angle has been described in the literature.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to verify the reproducibility of this technique.
Material and Methods. One panoramic radiographic image was randomly chosen from a group of 191 images. The digital image was converted to analog and printed. The study involved 21 dentists, who positioned 4 dots on each side of the image (the orbitale and the porion, as well as the most superior and the most inferior points of the jaw’s articular surface). The points on each side were connected with 2 lines, A and B. To evaluate the accuracy of the lines, the equation of the straight lines was calculated and their slopes compared. The condylar guidance angle between the lines was calculated.
Results. The spread of the results for the condylar guidance angle on the right side was 30 degrees; on the left side it was more than 40 degrees. The SD for the slope of line A was 0.01 on both sides. The slope of line B varied from 0.25 to 0.34.
Conclusion. The use of panoramic images to obtain the condylar guidance angle is not recommended in clinical use.

Key words

reproducibility, guidance angle, panoramic image, condylar guidance

Słowa kluczowe

powtarzalność metody, kąt stawowy, zdjęcie tomograficzne, droga stawowa

References (19)

  1. The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94:10–92.
  2. dos Santos J Jr, Nelson S, Nowlin T. Comparison of condylar guidance setting obtained from a wax record versus an extraoral tracing: A pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89:54–59.
  3. Ogawa T, Koyano K, Suetsugu T. The influence of anterior guidance and condylar guidance on mandibular protrusive movement. J Oral Re-habil. 1997;24:303–309.
  4. Petrie CS, Woolsey GD, Williams K. Comparison of recordings obtained with computerized axiography and mechanical pantography at 2 time intervals. J Prosthodont. 2003;12:102–110.
  5. Pelletier LB, Campbell SD. Comparison of condylar control settings using three methods: A bench study. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;66:193–200.
  6. Thakur M, Jain V, Parkash H, Kumar P. A comparative evaluation of static and functional methods for recording centric relation and condylar guidance: A clinical study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012;12:175–181.
  7. Galagali G, Kalekhan SM, Nidawani P, Naik J, Behera S. 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.
  8. Shreshta P, Jain V, Bhalla A, Pruthi G. A comparative study to measure the condylar guidance by the radiographic and clinical methods. J Adv Prosthodont. 2012;4:153–157.
  9. Gilboa I, Cardash HS, Kaffe I, Gross MD. Condylar guidance: Correlation between articular morphology and panoramic radiographic images in dry human skulls. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99:477–482.
  10. Wieczorek A, Loster J, Majewski S. Assessment of suitability of orthopantomographs in dental diagnostics of temporomandibular joints. J Stoma. 2012;65:845–854.
  11. Napier ID. Reference doses for dental radiography. Br Dent J. 1999;186:392–396.
  12. Williams JR, Montgomery A. Measurement of dose in panoramic dental radiology. Br J Radiol. 2000;73:1002–1006.
  13. Craddock FW. The accuracy and practical value of records of condyle path inclination. J Am Dent Assoc. 1949;38:697–710.
  14. Tannamala PK, Pulagam M, Pottem SR, Swapna B. Condylar guidance: Correlation between protrusive interocclusal record and panoramic radiographic image: A pilot study. J Prosthodont. 2012;21: 181–184.
  15. Loster JE, Ryniewicz W, Ryniewicz J, Wieczorek A. Assessment of the repeatability of condylar guidance angles obtained from panoramic radiographic images. J Stoma. 2014;67:841–849.
  16. Loster JE, Osiewicz MA, Groch M, Ryniewicz W, Wieczorek A. The prevalence of tmd in polish young adults. J Prosthodont. 2015 Dec 8. Availa-ble from:
  17. Osiewicz MA, Lobbezoo F, Loster BW, Wilkosz M, Naeije M, Ohrbach R. Rdc/tmd form. J Stoma. 2013;66:576–649.
  18. Weinberg LA. An evaluation of basic articulators and their concepts. Part II: Arbitrary, positional, semiadjustable articulators. J Prosthet Dent. 1963;13:645–663.
  19. Prasad KD, Shah N, Hegde C. A clinico-radiographic analysis of sagittal condylar guidance determined by protrusive interocclusal registra-tion and panoramic radiographic images in humans. Contemp Clin Dent. 2012;3:383–387.