You are here

Home » Content

KRANİYOMANDİBULAR ASİMETRİLERİN TANISINDA KEMİK SİNTİGRAFİSİNİN KULLANIMI

ASSESSMENT OF THE CRANIOMANDIBULA R ASYMMETRIES BY SKELETAL SCINTIGRAPHY

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 1994

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The usual approach to diagnosis and treatment planning of the patients with maxillofacial deformities is radiologic procedures besides careful clinical examinations. In this study, quantitavite bone scintigraphy of the mandible is compared with the other current diagnostic modalities in patients with craniomandibular asymmetry. The material consisted of 12 normal subjects and 12 patients with craniomandibular asymmetry age (8-18) yrs) and sex (7 female, 5 male) matched. In all subjcects, limited quantitative bone scintigraphy is used to calculate ratio of uptake in right and left regions of condyle, ramus and body of the mandible, then differences between the boths sides are documented. After this, those values of control and abnormal groups were compared to each other.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Maksillofasiyal deformiteli bireylerin tanı ve tedavi planlamasında klinik incelemenin yanında genellikle radyolojik yöntemlerden yararlanılır. Bu çalışmada, kraniyoman-dibular asimetrilerin tanısında kantitatif mandibular kemik sintigrafisi bilinen diğer tanı yöntemleri ile birlikte karşılaştırmalı olarak İncelenmiştir. Materyal yaş (8-18) ve cins (7 kız, 5 erkek) uyumlu 12 normal, 12 kramiyomandibular asimetrili bireyden oluşmuştur. Tüm bireylerde kantitatif kemik sintigrafisi yöntemi ile alt çenenin sağ ve sol kondil, ramus, korpus ve toplam bölümlerine ilişkin aktivite tutulum oranları (TO) belirlenmiş ve taraflar arasındaki farklar hesaplanmıştır. Daha sonra kontrol ve anomoli grubu bireylerine ilişkin değerler birbirleri ile karşılaştırılmıştır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-kraniyomandibular-asimetrilerin-tanisinda-kemik-sintigrafisinin-kullanimi.pdf
  • 2
144
148
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Bergersen EO. Hie male adolescent facial growth spurt: its prediction and relation to skeletal maturation. Angle Orthod 1972: 42: 319-38.
2. Danoff RB, Jeffcoat MK, Kaplan ML. Use of a miniaturized detector in facial bone scanning. IntJ Oral Surg 1973: 7: 482-87.
3. Egermark-Eriksson I, Carlsson GE, Magnusson T. A long-term epidemiologic study of the relationship between occlusal factors and mandibular dysfunction in children and adolescents. J Dent Res 1987: 66: 67-71.
4. Egermark-Eriksson I, Carlsson GE, Magnusson T, Thilan-der B. A longitudinal study on malocclusion in relation to signs and symptoms of cranio-mandibular disorders in children and adolescents. Eur J Orthod 1990:12: 339-407.
5. Feldmann G, Linder-Aronson S, Rindler A, Söderström U. Orthodontic and surgical treatment of unilateral condylar hyperplasia during growth: a case report. Eur J Orthod 1991:13:143¬48.
6. Harvold EP. Bone remodelling and orthodontics. Eur J Orthod 1985: 7:217-30.
7. Kaban LB, Cisneros GJ. Assessement of mandibular growth by skeletal scintigraphy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1984: 42: 18-22.
8. Mongini F. Schmid W. Conservative treatment of mandibular asymmetries during growth. Eur J Orthod 1987: 9:51-67.
9. Mongini F. Combined method to determine the therapeutic position for occJusaLrehabilitation. J Prosthod Dent 1982: 47: 434-39.
10. Moore RN, Moyer BA, DuBois LM. Skeletal maturation and craniofacial growth. Am J Orhod 1990: 98:33-40.
11. Owen A. Morphologic changes in the sagittal dimension using Frankel appliances. Am J Orthod 1981: 80: 573-603.
12.
Öztür
k G. Gnatoloji, Teori ve Pratiğe Giriş. İÜ Dişhekim-liği Fakültesi Yayın No.41, İstanbul, 1982.
13.
Öztür
k Y. Bir faciale hemiatrophie vakasının Ricketts'in frontal sefalometrik analiz yöntemi ile incelenmesi. MÜ Diş Hek. Fak. Derg, 1985: Cilt 1, Sayı 7: 7-12.
14. Pancherz H. The effect of continuous bite jumping on the dentofacİal complex:a follow-up study. Eur J Orthod 1981: 3: 49-60.
15. Pancherz H,. Hâgg U. Dentofacial orthopaedics in relation to somatic maturation. An analysis of 70 consecutive cases treated with the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod 1985:88: 273-87.
16. Philippe J. Ortohodontie, des principes et une technique. J Pelat Ed Paris, 1972.
17. Pirttiniemi P, Kantomaa T, Lahtela P. Relationship between craniofacial and condyle path asymmetry in unilateral cross-bite patients Eur J Orthod 1990:12:408-13.
18. Proffit WR. Orthodontic treatment planning. In: Contemporary Orthodontics. Mosby Comp London 1986: 219-21.
19. Matteson SR, Proffit WR, Terry BC. et al. The use of bone scanning with 99 m Technetium phosphate to assess condylar hyperplasia: a review and report of two cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1985: 60:356-67.
20. Sarnat BG. Developmental facial abnormalities and the temporomandibular joint. J Am Dent Assoc 1969: 79: 108-117.
21. Schmid W, Mongini F, Felisio A. A computer-based assessement of structural and displacement asymmetries of the mandible. Am J Orthod 1991:100:19-34.
22. Solberg WK, Bibb CA, Nordstrom BB, Hansson TL. Malocclusion associated with temporomandibular joint changes in young adult at autopsy.Am/Ortftorf 1986: 89: 326-30.
23. Tofani MI. Mandibular growth at puberty. Am J Orthod 1972: 62: 176-95.
24. Williams S, Melsen B: Condylar development and mandibular rotation and displacement during activator treatment. An implant study. Am J Orthod 1982: 82: 322-26.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com