Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Evaluation of joint kinematics in patients with condylar reconstruction using mandibular motion simulation based on
Aim:
To summarize the features of condylar kinematics in patients with condylar reconstruction using a mandibular motion simulation method based on intraoral scanning registration.
Materials And Methods:
Patients undergoing unilateral segmental mandibulectomy and autogenous bone reconstruction as well as healthy volunteers were enrolled in the study. Patients were grouped based on whether the condyles were reconstructed. Mandibular movements were recorded using a jaw tracking system, and kinematic models were simulated after registration. The path inclination of the condyle point, margin of border movement, deviation, and chewing cycle were analyzed. A t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were carried out.
Results:
A total of 20 patients, including 6 with condylar reconstruction and 14 with condylar preservation as well as 10 healthy volunteers were included. The patients with condylar reconstruction showed flatter movement paths of the condyle points. The mean inclination angle of the condylar movement paths of the patients with condylar reconstruction (0.57 ± 12.54 degrees) was significantly smaller than that of those with condylar preservation (24.70 ± 3.90 degrees, P = 0.014) during both maximum opening and protrusion (7.04 ± 12.21 degrees and 31.12 ± 6.79 degrees, respectively, P = 0.022). The inclination angle of the condylar movement paths of the healthy volunteers was 16.81 ± 3.97 degrees during maximum opening and 21.54 ± 2.80 degrees during protrusion; no significant difference compared with the patients. The condyles of the affected side tended to deviate laterally in all patients during mouth opening and protrusion. Patients with condylar reconstruction showed more severe symptoms of mouth opening limitation and mandibular movement deviation as well as shorter chewing cycles than patients with condylar preservation.
Conclusion:
Patients with condylar reconstruction showed flatter movement paths of the condyle points, greater lateral motion range, and shorter chewing cycles than those with condylar preservation. The method of mandibular motion simulation based on intraoral scanning registration was feasible to simulate condylar movement.
