Centric relation—A biological perspective of a technical concept

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundFew terms and concepts have been so extensively debated in dentistry as the words ‘centric relation’ (CR). Debates involve its biological, diagnostic and therapeutic usefulness.MethodsA review of the literature on the current concepts on CR as a diagnostic or therapeutic aid in dentistry was provided. Clinical trials assessing the superiority of one CR recording method over the others to identify patients with temporomandibular disorders (diagnostic use) or to manage patients with prosthodontic or orthodontic needs (therapeutic use) were tentatively included.ResultsDue to the absence of literature addressing either of the above targets, a comprehensive overview was provided. The diagnostic use of CR as a reference position to identify the correct position of the temporomandibular joint condyle within the glenoid fossa is not supported and lacks anatomical support. From a therapeutic standpoint, the use of CR can be pragmatically useful in prosthodontics as a maxillo‐mandibular reference position when occlusal re‐organization is warranted and/or when the position of maximum intercuspation is no longer available.ConclusionsThe derived occlusal goals from a diagnostic misuse of CR are generally the result of circular reasoning, that is a technique is based on the recording of a certain condylar position that is believed to be ‘ideal’ and the treatment is considered successful when such position is shown by the specific instrument that was manufactured for that purpose. The term ‘Centric Relation’ might be replaced with the term ‘Maxillo‐Mandibular Utility Position’.