nach oben

Clinical Oral Investigations

Erschienen in:

07.11.2017 | Original Article

Mandibular kinematics and maximum voluntary bite force following segmental resection of the mandible without or with reconstruction

verfasst von: Sabine S. Linsen, Annina Oikonomou, Markus Martini, Marcus Teschke

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose was to analyze mandibular kinematics and maximum voluntary bite force in patients following segmental resection of the mandible without and with reconstruction (autologous bone, alloplastic total temporomandibular joint replacement (TMJ TJR)).

Materials and methods

Subjects operated from April 2002 to August 2014 were enrolled in the study. Condylar (CRoM) and incisal (InRoM) range of motion and deflection during opening, condylar retrusion, incisal lateral excursion, mandibular rotation angle during opening, and maximum voluntary bite force were determined on the non-affected site and compared between groups. Influence of co-factors (defect size, soft tissue deficit, neck dissection, radiotherapy, occlusal contact zones (OCZ), and time) was determined.

Results

Twelve non-reconstructed and 26 reconstructed patients (13 autologous, 13 TMJ TJR) were included in the study. InRoM opening and bite force were significantly higher (P ≤ .024), and both condylar and incisal deflection during opening significantly lower (P ≤ .027) in reconstructed patients compared with non-reconstructed. Differences between the autologous and the TMJ TJR group were statistically not significant. Co-factors defect size, soft tissue deficit, and neck dissection had the greatest impact on kinematics and number of OCZs on bite force.

Conclusions

Reconstructed patients (both autologous and TMJ TJR) have better overall function than non-reconstructed patients.

Clinical relevance

Reconstruction of segmental mandibular resection has positive effects on mandibular function. TMJ TJR seems to be a suitable technique for the reconstruction of mandibular defects including the TMJ complex.

Gemeinsames Krebsregister (2015) Krebsinzidenz und Krebsmortalität 2009–2012. Berlin

Fayos JV, Beland F (1981) An inquiry on the quality of live after curative treatment. In: Karger AR (ed) Head and Neck Oncology. Controversies in cancer treatment. Boston Hall HG, Boston, pp 99–109

van Gemert J, Holtslag I, van der Bilt A, Merkx M, Koole R, Van Cann E (2015) Health-related quality of life after segmental resection of the lateral mandible: free fibula flap versus plate reconstruction. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 43:658–662CrossRefPubMed

Linsen S, Schmidt-Beer U, Fimmers R, Grüner M, Koeck B (2009) Craniomandibular pain, bite force, and oral health related quality of life in patients with jaw resections. J Pain Symptom Manag 37:94–106CrossRef

Chiapasco M, Romeo E, Coggiola A, Brusati R (2011) Long-term outcome of dental implants placed in revascularized fibula free flaps used for the reconstruction of maxillo-mandibular defects due to extreme atrophy. Clin Oral Implants Res 22:83–91CrossRefPubMed

Vega L, Meara D (2016) Mandibular replacement utilizing TMJ TJR devices. In: Mercuri LG (ed) Temporomandibular joint total joint replacement—TMJ TJR. Springer International Publishing AG, Basel, pp 165–183CrossRef

Westermark A, Hedén P, Aagaard E, Cornelius CP (2011) The use of TMJ Concepts prostheses to reconstruct patients with major temporomandibular joint and mandibular defects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:487–496CrossRefPubMed

Mercuri LG (2009) Condyle replacement after tumor resection: comparison of individual prefabricated titanium implants and costochondral grafts. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 108:153–155CrossRefPubMed

Perez DE, Wolford LM, Schneiderman E, Movahed R, Bourland C, Gutierrez EP (2016) Does unilateral temporomandibular total joint reconstruction result in contralateral joint pain and dysfunction? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 74:1539–1547CrossRefPubMed

10.

Urken ML, Buchbinder D, Weinberg H, Vickery C, Sheiner A, Parker R, Schaefer J, Som P, Shapiro A, Lawson W et al (1991) Functional evaluation following microvascular oromandibular reconstruction of the oral cancer patient: a comparative study of reconstructed and nonreconstructed patients. Laryngoscope 101:935–950PubMed

11.

Helkimo E, Helkimo M, Carlsson GE (1971) Chewing efficiency in a Lapp population in Northern Finland. Proc 2nd Int Symp Circumpolar Health, Oulu

12.

Baqaien MA, Al-Salti FM, Muessig D (2007) Changes in condylar path inclination during maximum protrusion between the ages of 6 and 12 years. J Oral Rehabil 34:27–33CrossRefPubMed

13.

Howell PG, Ellis S, Johnson CW, Watson IB, Klineberg I (1993) The recording and analysis of EMG and jaw tracking. II. Reproducibility of jaw tracking. J Oral Rehabil 20:33–43CrossRefPubMed

14.

Throckmorton GS, Teenier TJ, Ellis E 3rd (1992) Reproducibility of mandibular motion and muscle activity levels using a commercial computer recording system. J Prosthet Dent 68:348–354CrossRefPubMed

15.

Yoon HJ, Zhao KD, Rebellato J, An KN, Keller EE (2006) Kinematic study of the mandible using an electromagnetic tracking device and custom dental appliance: introducing a new technique. J Biomech 39:2325–2330CrossRefPubMed

16.

Linsen SS, Reich RH, Teschke M (2012) Mandibular kinematic in patients with alloplastic total TMJ replacement—a prospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:2057–2064CrossRefPubMed

17.

Linsen SS, Reich RH, Teschke M (2013) Maximum voluntary bite force in patients with alloplastic total TMJ replacement—a prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41:423–428CrossRefPubMed

18.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, STROBE Initiative (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 147:573–577CrossRef

19.

Celebi N, Rohner EC, Gateno J, Noble PC, Ismaily EK, Teichgraeber JF, Xia JJ (2011) Development of a mandibular motion simulator for total joint replacement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:66–79CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lewis RP, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS (2001) Sex differences in mandibular movements during opening and closing. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 120:294–303CrossRef

21.

Matsumoto A, Celar RM, Celar A, Sato S, Suzuki Y, Slavicek R (1995) An analysis of hinge axis translation and rotation during opening and closing in dentulous and edentulous subjects. Cranio 13:238–241CrossRefPubMed

22.

Naeije M (2002) Local kinematic and anthropometric factors related to the maximum mouth opening in healthy individuals. J Oral Rehabil 29:534–539CrossRefPubMed

23.

Stavness I, Hannam AG, Lloyd JE, Fels S (2010) Predicting muscle patterns for hemimandibulectomy models. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 13:483–491CrossRef

24.

Cantor R, Curtis TA (1971) Prosthetic management of edentulous mandibulectomy patients. I Anatomic, physiologic, and psychologic considerations. J Prosthet Dent 25:446–457CrossRefPubMed

25.

Dimitroulis G (2014) Comparison of the outcomes of three surgical treatments for end-stage temporomandibular joint disease. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43:980–989CrossRefPubMed

26.

Voiner J, Yu J, Deitrich JP, Chafin C, Giannakopoulos H (2011) Analysis of mandibular motion following unilateral and bilateral alloplastic TMJ reconstruction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:569–571CrossRefPubMed

27.

Koolstra JH (2002) Dynamics of the human masticatory system. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 13:366–376CrossRefPubMed

28.

Bakke M, Holm B, Jensen BL, Michler L, Moller E (1990) Unilateral, isometric bite force in8-68-year-old women and men related to occlusal factors. Scand J Dent Res 98:149e–1158

29.

Helkimo E, Carlsson GE, Helkimo M (1977) Bite force and state of dentition. Acta Odontol Scand 35:297e–2302CrossRef

30.

Lipton J, Ship J, Larch-Robinson D (1993) Estimated prevalence and distribution of reported orofacial pain in the United States. J Am Dent Assoc 124:115e–1121CrossRef

31.

Curtis DA, Plesh O, Miller AJ, Curtis TA, Sharma A, Schweitzer R, Hilsinger RL, Schour L, Singer M (1997) A comparison of masticatory function in patients with or without reconstruction of the mandible. Head Neck 19:287–296CrossRefPubMed

32.

Huang X, Zhang G, Herring SW (1993) Effects of oral sensory afferents on mastication in the miniature pig. Dent Res 72:980e–9986CrossRef

33.

Lepley CR, Throckmorton GS, Ceen RF, Buschang PH (2011) Relative contributions of occlusion, maximum bite force, and chewing cycle kinematics to masticatory performance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139:606e–6613CrossRef

34.

Gerlach KL, Schwarz A (2002) Bite forces in patients after treatment of mandibular angle fractures with miniplate osteosynthesis according to Champy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 31:345e–3348CrossRef

35.

Wang JS, Stohler CS (1990) Textural properties of food used in studies of mastication. J Dent Res 69:1546e–11550CrossRef

36.

Komisar A (1990) The functional result of mandibular reconstruction. Laryngoscope 100:364–374CrossRefPubMed

37.

Weber C, Dommerisch S, Pau HW, Kramp B (2019) Limited mouth opening after primary therapy of head and neck cancer. Oral Maxillofac Surg 14:169–173CrossRef

38.

Teguh DN, Levendag PC, Voet P, van der Est H, Noever I, de Kruijf W, van Rooij P, Schmitz PI, Heijmen BJ (2008) Trismus in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: relationship with dose in structures of mastication apparatus. Head Neck 30:622–630CrossRefPubMed

39.

Kokosis G, Schmitz R, Powers DB, Erdmann D (2016) Mandibular reconstruction using the free vascularized fibula graft: an overview of different modifications. Arch Plast Surg 43(1):3–9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Mandibular kinematics and maximum voluntary bite force following segmental resection of the mandible without or with reconstruction
verfasst von: Sabine S. Linsen
Annina Oikonomou
Markus Martini
Marcus Teschke
Publikationsdatum: 07.11.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2263-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Mandibular kinematics and maximum voluntary bite force following segmental resection of the mandible without or with reconstruction

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

Prevention of coronal discoloration induced by regenerative endodontic treatment in an ex vivo model

Evaluation of the interface between gutta-percha and two types of sealers using scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

Change in reimbursement and costs in German oncological head and neck surgery over the last decade: ablative tongue cancer surgery and reconstruction with split-thickness skin graft vs. microvascular radial forearm flap

Oral cancer radiotherapy affects enamel microhardness and associated indentation pattern morphology

Retention force of removable partial dentures with different double crowns

Blood flow changes using a 3D xenogeneic collagen matrix or a subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage procedures: a pilot study

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter