4.3 Article

Three-dimensional comparative evaluation of articular disc position and other temporomandibular joint morphology in Class II horizontal and vertical cases with Class I malocclusion: A magnetic resonance imaging study

期刊

ANGLE ORTHODONTIST
卷 90, 期 5, 页码 707-714

出版社

E H ANGLE EDUCATION RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC
DOI: 10.2319/121519-801.1

关键词

Temporomandibular joint; Magnetic resonance imaging; TMD; Malocclusion; Orthodontics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate and compare articular disk position, condylar position, and joint spaces in Class II vertical, Class II horizontal, and Class I cases. The purpose was to assess the potential for development of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) in the three groups. Materials and Methods: A sample of 75 cases, 25 cases in each group of Class I, Class II vertical, and Class II horizontal, were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessments were made with a 1.5-Tesla basic system with a closed-mouth technique for evaluating articular disk position in the sagittal and transverse planes, condylar position, and joint spaces in the sagittal plane. Philips 3.0 software was used to analyze the MR images. Results: There was evidence of alterations in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) morphology in both Class II vertical and Class II horizontal cases, with maximum discrepancy in Class II vertical cases. MRI evaluation suggested a tendency for antero-medial disk displacement with anteriorly positioned condyles in Class II vertical cases. The discrepancy was milder in the Class II horizontal group. Conclusions: Class II vertical cases are more susceptible to the development of TMDs and should be subjected to TMJ evaluation before starting any orthodontic treatment to intercept and prevent a mild asymptomatic TMD from developing into a more severe form. Class II vertical cases should be subjected to MRI evaluation before starting any orthodontic treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据