Assessment of the Thickness of the Roof of the Glenoid Fossa Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Asymptomatic Korean Adult Patients

  • Park, Hyun-Jeong (Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Seo, Yo-Seob (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Yoon, A-Hyang (Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Kim, Ji Hoo (Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Ryu, Ji-Won (Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • Received : 2019.09.03
  • Accepted : 2019.09.04
  • Published : 2019.09.30


Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa (RGF) in Korean adult population without symptoms of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: CBCT Data from 111 Korean adult patients aged ${\geq}25years$ (55 males and 56 females) without signs and symptoms of TMD were analyzed retrospectively in this study. The thickness of the RGF was determined as the perpendicular distance between the 'glenoid fossa line' and 'middle cranial fossa line' on parasagittal and paracoronal reconstructions, respectively. The thickness of the RGF according to sex and age was analyzed using t-tests (p<0.05). Differences were also examined between the right and left sides, and between the paracoronal and parasagittal sides. Results: The mean thickness of the RGF in all subjects was $0.75{\pm}0.39mm$; there was no significant difference in thickness between male ($0.78{\pm}0.36mm$) and female ($0.72{\pm}0.30mm$). We found no correlation between age and the mean thickness of the RGF, when age was grouped by decade. However, when subjects were divided into >40 years and ${\leq}40years$ age groups, the thickness of the RGF was significantly different between the groups. Conclusions: We found that the thickness of the RGF did not differ by sex, but might be affected by aging. Further studies with larger numbers of subjects are needed to confirm the results of this study.


Supported by : Chosun University


  1. de Leeuw R, Klasser GD. Orofacial pain: guidelines for assessment, diagnosis, and management. 6th ed. Hanover Park, IL: Quintessence; 2018. p. 144-207.
  2. Lobo F, Tolentino ES, Iwaki LCV, Walewski LA, Takeshita WM, Chicarelli M. Imaginology tridimensional study of temporomandibular joint osseous components according to sagittal skeletal relationship, sex, and age. J Craniofac Surg 2019;30:1462-1465.
  3. Ilguy D, Ilguy M, Fisekcioglu E, Dolekoglu S, Ersan N. Articular eminence inclination, height, and condyle morphology on cone beam computed tomography. ScientificWorldJournal 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/761714.
  4. Buyuk C, Gunduz K, Avsever H. Prevalence and characteristics of pneumatizations of the articular eminence and roof of the glenoid fossa on cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol 2019;35:171-176.
  5. Soydan D, Dogan S, Canger EM, Cosgunarslan A, Akgun IE, Kis HC. Effect of internal derangements and degenerative bone changes on the minimum thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa in temporomandibular joint. Oral Radiol 2019. doi: 10.1007/s11282-019-00373-6. [Epub ahead of print]
  6. Koretsch LJ, Brook AL, Kader A, Eisig SB. Traumatic dislocation of the mandibular condyle into the middle cranial fossa: report of a case, review of the literature, and a proposal management protocol. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59:88-94.
  7. Honda K, Larheim TA, Sano T, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K, Westesson PL. Thickening of the glenoid fossa in osteoarthritis of the temporomandibular joint. An autopsy study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2001;30:10-13.
  8. Tsiklakis K, Syriopoulos K, Stamatakis HC. Radiographic examination of the temporomandibular joint using cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004;33:196-201.
  9. Nadaes MR, Lagos de Melo LP, Haiter Neto F, Freitas DQ. Correlation between temporomandibular joint temporal component pneumatization and morphology: analysis by cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;48:779-786.
  10. Ejima K, Schulze D, Stippig A, Matsumoto K, Rottke D, Honda K. Relationship between the thickness of the roof of glenoid fossa, condyle morphology and remaining teeth in asymptomatic European patients based on cone beam CT data sets. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013. doi:10.1259/dmfr/90929410.
  11. Honda K, Kawashima S, Kashima M, Sawada K, Shinoda K, Sugisaki M. Relationship between sex, age, and the minimum thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa in normal temporomandibular joints. Clin Anat 2005;18:23-26.
  12. Khojastepour L, Haghnegahdar A, Eisazadeh M, Bahreini M. Comparison between glenoid fossa roof thickness in TMD and non-TMD patients, a CBCT study. J Dent Shiraz Univ Med Sci 2019;20:165-170.
  13. Greene MW, Hackney FL, Van Sickels JE. Arthroscopy of the temporomandibular joint: an anatomic perspective. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47:386-389.
  14. Howard JA. Temporomandibular joint disorders in children. Dent Clin North Am 2013;57:99-127.
  15. Bender ME, Lipin RB, Goudy SL. Development of the pediatric temporomandibular joint. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2018;30:1-9.
  16. Owtad P, Park JH, Shen G, Potres Z, Darendeliler MA. The biology of TMJ growth modification: a review. J Dent Res 2013;92:315-321.
  17. Al-koshab M, Nambiar P, John J. Assessment of condyle and glenoid fossa morphology using CBCT in South-East Asians. PLoS One 2015;10:e0121682.
  18. Owtad P, Potres Z, Shen G, Petocz P, Darendeliler MA. A histochemical study on condylar cartilage and glenoid fossa during mandibular advancement. Angle Orthod 2011;81:270-276.
  19. Jain A, Thenmozhi MS. A study on morphology and morphometry of mandibular fossa. Drug Invent Today 2018;10:2289-2292.
  20. Caruso S, Storti E, Nota A, Ehsani S, Gatto R. Temporomandibular joint anatomy assessed by CBCT images. Biomed Res Int 2017. doi: 10.1155/2017/2916953.