Aims: A clinical study to compare the horizontal condylar guidance using protrusive interocclusal records, orthopantomography (OPG), and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in edentulous patients.
Subjects and methods: Thirty-six edentulous subjects were selected as per predetermined criteria. Horizontal condylar guidance was recorded using protrusive interocclusal records (PIR), OPG, and CBCT for each patient. The PIR were obtained using extraoral Gothic arch tracers to program the Hanau articulator. The horizontal condylar guidance angles (HCGAs) were digitally constructed using appropriate software along the posterior slope of articular eminence for all radiographs. The collected data were recorded, tabulated, and statistically analyzed.
Results: The condylar guidance angle values were tested for significance to compare the different angles. The correlation of HCGA measurements on both sides between the three groups was analyzed. The PIR and OPG methods (p = 0.001), as well as the OPG and CBCT methods (p = 0.001), show substantial differences on both sides. On the contrary, the PIR and CBCT methods did not differ significantly (p = 0.11).
Conclusion: Cone-beam computed tomography is as reliable and accurate as the clinical method. A significant correlation exists between the clinical method and CBCT. It can be used as a dependable adjunct to the clinical method of HCGA measurement.
Clinical significance: Cone-beam computed tomography can overcome the shortcomings of the conventional clinical methods to determine the accurate horizontal condylar guidance angulation measurement. It is safer with minimum discomfort and wastage of time for the patients.
Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; Horizontal condylar guidance; Panoramic radiography Protrusive interocclusal records..