			Home About us Contact

Molar Area (molar + area)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	75%

Selected Abstracts

Uncommon dermoid cyst presented in the mandible possibly originating from embryonic epithelial remnants

JOURNAL OF ORAL PATHOLOGY & MEDICINE, Issue 3 2002
Kazuo Komiyama
Abstract A case of an intraosseous dermoid cyst that had developed in the mandible of a 29-year-old-male is reported. The patient was admitted to our dental clinic complaining of pain in the right molar area of the mandible. The patient had no particular history of the present illness. A radiographic examination revealed diffuse bone absorption in the right molar area. A biopsy showed the lesion to be an intraosseous dermoid cyst which was surgically enucleated. Microscopic examination of the excised tissue showed it to be well circumscribed with fibrous tissues, and the cystic space lined by keratinized epithelium. In addition, sweat glands and hair follicle-like skin appendages were identified in the cystic wall, where a daughter cyst was also found. We suggested that this uncommon cyst had developed in the mandible, as a result of embryonic epithelium migration. The patient remained in good health during the three year follow-up. [source]

Evaluation of maximal bite force in temporomandibular disorders patients

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION, Issue 8 2006
E. M. KOGAWA
summary, The aim of this study was to evaluate the maximum bite force in temporomandibular disorders (TMD) patients. Two hundred women were equally divided into four groups: myogenic TMD, articular TMD, mixed TMD and control. The maximum bite force was measured in the first molar area, on both sides, in two sessions, using an IDDK (Kratos) Model digital dynamometer, adapted to oral conditions. Three-way anova, Tukey and Pearson correlation tests were used for the statistical analysis. The level of statistical significance was given when P , 0·05. The maximal bite force values were significantly higher in the control group than in the experimental ones (P = 0·00), with no significant differences between sides. Higher values were obtained in the second session (P = 0·001). Indeed, moderate negative correlation was found between age and bite force, when articular, mixed groups and all groups together were evaluated. A moderate negative correlation was also detected between TMD severity and the maximal bite force values for myogenic, mixed and all groups together. Authors concluded that the presence of masticatory muscle pain and/or TMJ inflammation can play a role in maximum bite force. The mechanisms involved in this process, however, are not well understood and deserve further investigation. [source]

Actions of melatonin mixed with collagenized porcine bone versus porcine bone only on osteointegration of dental implants

JOURNAL OF PINEAL RESEARCH, Issue 3 2010
José Luis Calvo-Guirado
Abstract:, This study evaluated the effect of the topical application of melatonin mixed with collagenized porcine bone on the osteointegration on the rough discrete calcium deposit (DCD) surface implants in Beagle dogs 3 months after their insertion. In preparation for subsequent insertion of dental implants, lower molars were extracted from 12 Beagle dogs. Each mandible received two parallel wall expanded platform implants with a DCD surface of 4 mm in diameter and 10 mm in length. The implants were randomly assigned to the distal sites on each mandible in the molar area and the gaps were filled with 5 mg lyophilized powdered melatonin and porcine bone and collagenized porcine bone alone. Ten histological sections per implant were obtained for histomorphometric studies. After a 4-wk treatment period, melatonin plus porcine bone significantly increased the perimeter of bone that was in direct contact with the treated implants (P < 0.0001), bone density (P < 0.0001), and new bone formation (P < 0.0001) in comparison with porcine bone alone around the implants. Melatonin plus collagenized porcine bone on DCD surface may act as a biomimetic agent in the placement of endo-osseous dental implants and enhance the osteointegration. Melatonin combined with porcine bone on DCD implants reveals more bone in implant contact at 12 wk (84.5 ± 1.5%) compared with porcine bone alone treated area (67.17 ± 1.2%). [source]

Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 4 2005
Heng-Li Huang
Abstract Objectives: Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of splinted prosthetic crowns were studied and stress analyses were evaluated with different types of implant support, including standard, wide or two implant(s) for partial, posterior edentulous restorations. Material and methods: The FE models were constructed based on a cadaver mandible containing the 2nd premolar and the 1st molar. The crowns of these two teeth were modeled as connected and disconnected to mimic the splinted and non-splinted designs, respectively. One standard implant was placed at the premolar region, while three types of implant support, one at a time (the standard implant, wide implant and two implants), were used to support the molar crown. A 100 N oblique load was applied to the buccal cusp on each crown. The FE simulation was validated experimentally via strain gauge measurement. Results: The experimental data were well correlated with the FE predictions (r2=0.97). When compared with the standard implant used in the molar area, the wide implant and two implants reduced the peak stress in crestal bone by 29,37% for both splinted and non-splinted cases. Inserting the standard implant into both the premolar and molar area, the bone stresses were identical for splinted and non-splinted designs. However, splinting the adjacent crowns has shown to decrease the bone stresses at the premolar region by 25%, while the wide implant or two implants were placed at the molar region. Conclusion: The biomechanical advantages of using the wide implant or two implants are almost identical. The benefit of load sharing by the splinted crowns is notable only when the implants on the premolar and molar regions have different supporting ability. Résumé Des modèles d'éléments finis (FE) tridimensionnels de couronnes prothétiques attachés ont étéétudiés et les analyses de stress ont étéévalués avec différents types de support d'implants comprenant le standard, le large ou deux implants pour des restaurations postérieures partielles. Les modèles FE ont été construits sur base de mandibule de cadavre contenant deux prémolaires et une molaire. Les couronnes de ces deux dents ont été modelées comme connectées et non-connectées pour mimer respectivement les modèles avec attache ou sans. Un implant standard a été placé dans la région prémolaire tandis que trois types d'implants supportaient en un temps (l'implant standard, l'implant large et deux implants) ont été utilisés pour porter la couronne molaire. Une charge oblique de 100 N a été appliquée sur la cuspide vestibulaire de chaque couronne. La simulation FE a été validée expérimentalement via une mesure par jauge de force. Les données expérimentales étaient en bonne corrélation avec les prévisions FE (r2=0,97). Comparés à l'implant standard utilisé dans la zone molaire, l'implant large et la combinaison de deux implants réduisait le pic de stress dans l'os crestal de 29 à 37% tant dans les cas attachés que non-attachés. En insérant l'implant standard dans la zone prémolaire et molaire, le stress osseux était identique pour les modèles attachés et non-attachés. Cependant, l'attache reliant les couronnes adjacentes s'accompagnait d'une dimininution des stress osseux dans la région prémolaire de 25%, tandis que l'implant large ou les deux implants étaient placés dans la région molaire. Les avantages biomécaniques de l'utilisation d'un implant large ou de deux implants sont quasi identiques. Le bénéfice d'une charge partagée par les couronnes solidarisées n'est visible que lorsque les implants des régions prémolaires et molaires ont des capacités de support différentes. Zusammenfassung Ziel: Bei der Rekonstruktion von Lücken im hinteren Seitenzahnbereich untersuchte man in einem dreidimensionalen Finiteelement-Modell (FE) zementierte Kronen und wertete in Belastungs-Analysen verschiedene Implantatabstützungen aus, nämlich auf Standardimplantaten, Wide neck-Implantaten oder auf zwei Implantaten. Material und Methoden: Das FE-Modell basierte auf den Werten eines Leichenunterkiefers in der Region des zweiten Prämolaren und ersten Molaren. Die Kronen auf diesen beiden Zähne wurden jeweils zusammenhängend und einzeln modelliert, so dass man die verblockte und unverblockte Situation nachempfinden konnte. In der Prämolarenregion implantierte man ein Standartimplantat. In der Molarenregion wählte man jeweils eine von drei verschiedenen Varianten der Abstützung für die Kronen: ein Standardimplantat, ein Wide neck-Implantat oder zwei Implantate. Auf den buccalen Höcker jeder Krone liess man schräg eine Kraft von 100 N auftreffen. Die FE-Simulation eichte man experimentell mit Hilfe von Dehnmessstreifen. Resultate: Die experimentellen Daten korrelierten sehr gut mit den FE-Voraussagen (r2=0.97). Verglich man die in der Molarenregion verwendeten Standartimplantate mit den Wide neck-Implantaten und zwei Implantaten, so reduzierte sich die Spitzenbelastung im crestalen Knochen um 29,37%, bei den verblockten wie auch bei den unverblockten Versionen. Setzte man sowohl im Prämolaren wie auch im Molarengebiet Standardimplantate, so war die Knochenbelastung für die verblockte wie auch für die unverblockte Version gleich gross. Wenn aber das Wide neck-Implantat oder zwei Implantate in der Molarenregion gesetzt worden waren, so vermochte die Verblockung der Implantat-Kronen die Knochenbelastung in der Prämolarenregion um 25% zu senken. Zusammenfassung: Ob man das Wide neck-Implantat oder zwei Implantate verwendet, die biomechanischen Vorteile sind beinahe identisch. Man erreicht durch das Verblocken von Kronen erst dann einen spürbaren Vorteil bezüglich Lastenverteilung, wenn die Implantate in der Prämolaren- und Molarenregion verschiedene Tragfähigkeiten aufweisen. Resumen Objetivos: Se estudiaron modelos tridimensionales de elementos finitos (FE) de coronas protésicas y se evaluó el análisis de estrés con diferentes tipos de soporte implantario, incluyendo implantes estándar, anchos o dos implantes, para restauraciones parciales en posteriores edéntulos. Material y métodos: Se construyeron dos modelos FE basados en mandíbula de cadáver conteniendo el 2° premolar y el 1er molar. Las coronas de estos dos dientes se modelaron como conectadas y desconectadas para imitar los diseños conectados y desconectados, respectivamente. Se colocó un implante estándar en la región premolar, mientras que para soportar la corona molar se colocaron tres tipos de implantes, uno a la vez, (un implante estándar, un implante ancho y dos implantes). Se aplicó una carga oblicua de 100N en la cúspide bucal de cada corona. La simulación de elementos finitos se validó experimentalmente por medio de medición de tensión. Resultados: Los datos experimentales se correlacionaron bien con las predicciones FE (r2=0.97). Al comparase a los implantes estándar usados en el área molar, el implante ancho y dos implantes redujeron el pico de estrés en el hueso crestal en un 29,37% tanto para los caso ferulizados como para los no ferulizados. Al insertar el implante estándar tanto en la región premolar como en la molar, los estrés óseos fueron idénticos para los diseños ferulizados como para los no ferulizados. De todos modos, la ferulización de las coronas adyacentes mostró un descenso del estrés óseo en un 25%, mientras el implante ancho o los dos implantes se colocaron en la región molar. Conclusión: Las ventajas biomecánicas de usar el implante ancho o dos implantes fueron casi idénticas. El beneficio de compartir la carga al ferulizar las coronas es notable solo cuando los implantes en las regiones premolar y molar tienen diferente capacidad de soporte. [source]