Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM42688654
Evaluation of condylar position displacement using various centric relation recording techniques based on maximum intercuspation position: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Huang Ling-Shiuan, Huang Yen-Chang, Wu I-Ting, et al. · Journal of dental sciences · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.1016/j.jds.2025.07.3465
Findings
15 findings
| Population | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Chin-point guidance centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Z-axis | SMD -0.04 [-0.13, 0.04] GRADE not reported 2 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Chin-point guidance centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Y-axis | SMD 1.17 [0.19, 2.16] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Chin-point guidance centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, X-axis | SMD 0.04 [-0.37, 0.45] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Bimanual manipulation centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Y-axis | SMD 0.4 [-0.21, 1.01] GRADE not reported 4 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Bimanual manipulation centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, X-axis | SMD 0.12 [-0.21, 0.45] GRADE not reported 5 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Bimanual manipulation centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Z-axis | SMD -0.01 [-0.22, 0.19] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Power centric bite registration centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Z-axis | SMD 0.66 [0.52, 0.8] GRADE not reported 2 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Power centric bite registration centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Y-axis | SMD 0.76 [0.53, 1.0] GRADE not reported 6 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Power centric bite registration centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, X-axis | SMD 0.35 [0.17, 0.53] GRADE not reported 6 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Gothic arch tracer centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Y-axis | SMD 0.89 [-0.48, 2.26] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Adults with complete or near-complete dentition, mostly healthy without TMD | Gothic arch tracer (GA) centric relation bite | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) as reference | Condylar position displacement, CR minus MIP, Z-axis Clinical measurement of condylar position (e.g., condylar position indicator) · GA technique; Z-axis | SMD 0.03 [-0.22, 0.27] GRADE not reported 1 study |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Gothic arch tracer centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, X-axis | SMD 0.43 [-0.03, 0.89] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Active movement centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Z-axis | SMD -0.06 [-0.24, 0.12] GRADE not reported 2 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Active movement centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, X-axis | SMD 0.0 [-0.2, 0.2] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
| Participants with complete or near-complete dentition | Active movement centric relation recording | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | Condylar position displacement, Y-axis | SMD -0.34 [-0.7, 0.03] GRADE not reported 3 studies |
Included primary studies 21
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Celar 2013 Guided and unguided mandibular reference positions in asymptomatic individuals DOI:10.1111/ocr.12001 | 2012 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Celar et al. 2013 Guided and unguided mandibular reference positions in asymptomatic individuals. PMID:23311657 | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Freudenthaler 2022 Static mandibular condyle positions studied by MRI and condylar position indicator DOI:10.1038/s41598-022-22745-5 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Freudenthaler et al. 2022 Static mandibular condyle positions studied by MRI and condylar position indicator. PMID:36284175 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Jasz 2024 Different methods of determining centric relation – comparison with a digital mandibular motion analyser DOI:10.1186/s12903-024-04131-x | 2024 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Jász et al. 2024 Different methods of determining centric relation - comparison with a digital mandibular motion analyser. PMID:38500122 | 2024 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Keshvad 2003 Comparison of the replicability of routinely used centric relation registration techniques DOI:10.1016/s1059-941x(03)00036-6 | 2003 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Keshvad and Winstanley 2003 Comparison of the replicability of routinely used centric relation registration techniques. PMID:12964681 | 2003 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Moreno 2015 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Padala 2012 Comparative evaluation of condylar position in symptomatic (TMJ dysfunction) and asymptomatic individuals DOI:10.4103/0970-9290.99060 | 2012 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Padala et al. 2012 Comparative evaluation of condylar position in symptomatic (TMJ dysfunction) and asymptomatic individuals. PMID:22842268 | 2012 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Paixao 2007 Evaluation of the reproducibility of two techniques used to determine and record centric relation in angle's class I patients DOI:10.1590/s1678-77572007000400007 | 2007 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Paixão et al. 2007 Evaluation of the reproducibility of two techniques used to determine and record centric relation in angle's class I patients. PMID:19089144 | 2007 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Polasek 2022 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Radej 2022 The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation DOI:10.1155/2022/1439203 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Radej and Szarmach 2022 The Role of Maxillofacial Structure on Condylar Displacement in Maximum Intercuspation and Centric Relation. PMID:35097107 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Schmitt 2003 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Weffort 2010 Condylar displacement between centric relation and maximum intercuspation in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals DOI:10.2319/090909-510.1 | 2010 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Weffort and Fantini 2010 Condylar displacement between centric relation and maximum intercuspation in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. PMID:20578853 | 2010 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Wood 1994 DOI:10.1043/0003-3219(1994)064<0211:rotcrb>2.0.co;2 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Wood and Elliott 1994 Reproducibility of the centric relation bite registration technique. PMID:8060017 | 1994 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Participants with complete or near-complete dentition; at least 5 subjects; edentulous and removable denture wearers excluded | Healthy adults with complete dentition, mostly no TMD (n=12 studies) |
| Intervention | Techniques for obtaining the centric relation (CR) condylar position | CPG (n=3), BM (n=5), PCR (n=6), GA (n=3), AM (n=3) |
| Comparison | Maximum intercuspation position (MIP) | MIP (n=12) |
| Outcomes | Condylar position difference CR-MIP (mean, SD) on X, Y, Z axes as SMD | Condylar displacement CR-MIP on X, Y, Z axes (n=12) |
| Study designs | Controlled and quasi-randomized trials; English original research | Cross-sectional studies, no RCTs (n=12) |
| Timing | Not specified | Not specified |
AMSTAR 2 items
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | No | No | yes |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | No | No | yes |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | No | Partial Yes | no |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | No | No | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | No | No | yes |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Partial Yes | Yes | no |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | RCT: N/A · NRSI: Yes | NRSI: Yes · RCT: N/A | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | No | No | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | RCT: N/A · NRSI: No | NRSI: No · RCT: N/A | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | No | Yes | no |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | No | No | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Critically Low | Critically Low | yes |