ReviewMedicina2024Open Access

Debate on the morphological variability of the lateral pterygoid muscle

A critical review arguing that the lateral pterygoid muscle cannot be reduced to a single fixed two-headed template: its internal structure, head number, origins, insertions, and accessory muscular relations are substantially more variable than many standard descriptions imply.

Mugurel Constantin Rusu · Corneliu Toader · Răzvan Costin Tudose · Laura Octavia Grigoriţa
The central conclusion

There is no one-size-fits-all anatomical pattern for the LPM.

The review concludes that the lateral pterygoid muscle is structurally and functionally heterogeneous. Personalized anatomical assessment—preferably with modern imaging when possible—is therefore more defensible than reliance on a rigid standard template.

Case-by-caseevaluation is the practical consequence of morphological unpredictability
01 · Core debate

Why the standard description is insufficient

Traditional anatomy often describes the LPM as having superior and inferior heads. The paper reviews evidence showing that head number, bundle arrangement, pennation, and topographic organization can depart substantially from this simplified model.

2

Classical heads

Superior and inferior heads remain the usual teaching framework.

3+

Possible heads

Middle or medial additional heads and unusual bundle configurations have been reported.

Variable

Pennation

Internal architecture may be penniform and functionally heterogeneous.

Not fixed

Insertions

Attachments to the mandibular condyle and TMJ disc are themselves variable.

02 · Main variables

The anatomy varies along several axes at once

The paper does not treat variability as a single anomaly category. Instead, it assembles a broader spectrum of structural variables that jointly shape how the muscle should be interpreted.

01

Head number and internal bundles

Beyond the superior and inferior heads, additional heads and differently partitioned bundles have been described, challenging the idea that the LPM is always organized in the same way.

02

Origins from the sphenoid and pterygoid plate

Variations in the greater wing of the sphenoid, the lateral pterygoid plate, or extensions from it can enlarge or modify the area of origin.

03

Insertions to condyle and disc

The muscle may insert variably into the mandibular condyle and temporomandibular joint disc, and aberrant bundles may attach outside the mandibular notch.

04

Accessory muscles and neighbouring variants

Rarely encountered muscles—including the pterygoideus proprius, pterygospinosus, pterygofacialis, pterygotemporal, maxillomandibularis, and sphenomandibular muscle—expand the regional diversity and may affect interpretation.

03 · Conceptual map

From textbook template to individualized morphology

This simplified map summarizes the paper’s logic: each additional layer of variation reduces the usefulness of a rigid “two heads only” doctrine.

Textbook2 headssimple template Head numbersuperior / inferiorplus extra heads Originsgreater wingpterygoid plate variants Pennation / bundles InsertionscondyleTMJ disc / aberrant sites Accessory musclespterygoideus proprius,pterygospinosus, etc. ClinicalInterpret case by caseUse imaging when available
04 · Clinical significance

Why the debate is not merely terminological

If the LPM is structurally heterogeneous, functional interpretations, imaging analysis, temporomandibular-joint discussions, and therapeutic reasoning should avoid assuming a universal architecture.

Practical takeaway: the paper urges individualized evaluation of the lateral pterygoid muscle and explicitly states that the conclusions of earlier studies do not fit neatly together into one general anatomical theory.