Mandibular asymmetry and condylar position in children with unilateral posterior crossbite

The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine if condylar position in children with functional unilateral crossbites was different from that found in children with Class I noncrossbite malocclusions and if there was a change in condylar position after correction of the crossbite by palatal expansion. Mandibular asymmetry in children with functional unilateral posterior crossbite was also compared to that of a Class I noncrossbite group. Thirty-one children aged 6 to 14 years (mean, 9.3 years; standard deviation, 2.2) with functional unilateral crossbites were compared to 31 children aged 9.5 to 14.1 years (mean, 11.9 years; standard deviation, 1.3) exhibiting Angle Class I noncrossbite malocclusions. Pretreatment submentovertex radiographs were used to study mandibular skeletal, dental, and positional asymmetries with reference to cranial floor and mandibular coordinate systems. In addition, the anterior, superior, and posterior joint spaces were measured to determine differences between the groups with the use of pretreatment and posttreatment horizontally corrected tomograms of the temporomandibular joints. Finally, the distances of the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first molar relative to the buccal groove of the lower first molar were measured in both groups before treatment. Univariate analyses revealed that the mandibles of children in the functional unilateral posterior crossbite group exhibited asymmetry in both anteroposterior and transverse dimensions when compared with the Class I noncrossbite group (P <. 05). These asymmetries were the result of a functional deviation of the mandible that was present in all subjects in the crossbite group. This deviation was manifested occlusally by a Class II subdivision on the crossbite side as indicated from the study model analysis (P <.05). Examination of condylar position as evidenced by horizontally corrected tomograms demonstrated a large standard deviation, resulting in an inability to detect any significant differences within or between groups at both T1 and T2 (P >.05). This study raised the question of the appropriateness of measuring joint spaces for routine diagnostic purposes.