A new perspective for radiologic findings of bruxism on dental panoramic radiography.
Biological adaptation
Bone remodeling
Bruxism
Mandibular cortical index
Panoramic radiography
Journal
Oral radiology
ISSN: 1613-9674
Titre abrégé: Oral Radiol
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 8806621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2023
07 2023
Historique:
received:
09
08
2022
accepted:
26
11
2022
medline:
8
6
2023
pubmed:
13
12
2022
entrez:
12
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study aims to evaluate whether there is a relationship between the appositional classification in the mandible angle region and the mandibular cortical index (MCI) seen in bruxist individuals and to differentiate between the bruxist group without mandibular apposition and the non-bruxist group on panoramic radiographs. The mandible angle region of 209 individuals, 170 bruxists and 39 non-bruxists, were included in the study. Each mandible angle apposition was classified as G0 (No directional change, no bone apposition)-G1 (Directional change on the basal cortex. No bone apposition)-G2 (Directional change plus generalized bone apposition with inhomogeneous surface)-G3 (Directional change plus localized bone apposition at one or more sites). The MCI of each individual was recorded according to their classified apposition. No statistically significant difference was found in the relationship between MCI and apposition severity in mandible angle grades in bruxist individuals (p = 0.063). A statistically significant difference was found between MCI and the bruxist G0/non-bruxist G0 groups (p < 0.001). While the MCI-C1 was higher in non-bruxist G0 individuals, the MCI-C2 was higher in bruxist G0 individuals. A statistically significant correlation was found between gender and severity of grades (p < 0.001). Although it is known that appositional changes are seen in the mandible angle region in bruxism, MCI can be used as a valuable radiologic diagnostic criterion during the evaluation of bruxist and healthy individuals in the G0 grade who have not yet radiologically demonstrated bone apposition in the mandible angle.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36504381
doi: 10.1007/s11282-022-00667-2
pii: 10.1007/s11282-022-00667-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
544-552Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Japanese Society for Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology.
Références
Lobbezoo F, Ahlberg J, Raphael K, Wetselaar P, Glaros A, Kato T, et al. International consensus on the assessment of bruxism: report of a work in progress. J Oral Rehabil. 2018;45:837–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12663 .
doi: 10.1111/joor.12663
pubmed: 29926505
pmcid: 6287494
Lobbezoo F, Lavigne G, Tanguay R, Montplaisir J. The effect of the catecholamine precursor L-dopa on sleep bruxism: a controlled clinical trial. Mov Disord. 1997;12:73–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.870120113 .
doi: 10.1002/mds.870120113
pubmed: 8990057
Lobbezoo F, van Denderen RJ, Verheij JG, Naeije M. Reports of SSRI-associated bruxism in the family physician’s office. J Orofac Pain. 2001;15:340–6.
pubmed: 12400402
Shetty S, Pitti V, Satish Babu C, Surendra Kumar G, Deepthi B. Bruxism: a literature review. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2010;10:141–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-011-0041-5 .
doi: 10.1007/s13191-011-0041-5
pubmed: 21886404
Satheeswarakumar LP, Elenjickal TJ, Ram SKM, Thangasamy K. Assessment of mandibular surface area changes in bruxers versus controls on panoramic radiographic images: a case control study. Open Dent J. 2018;12:753–61. https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901814010753 .
doi: 10.2174/1745017901814010753
Bayar GR, Tutuncu R, Acikel C. Psychopathological profile of patients with different forms of bruxism. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:305–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0492-9 .
doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0492-9
pubmed: 21221680
Misch CE. The effect of bruxism on treatment planning for dental implants. Dent Today. 2002;21:76–81.
pubmed: 12271847
Gulec M, Tassoker M, Ozcan S, Orhan K. Evaluation of the mandibular trabecular bone in patients with bruxism using fractal analysis. Oral Radiol. 2021;37:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-020-00422-5 .
doi: 10.1007/s11282-020-00422-5
pubmed: 31933121
Isman O. Evaluation of jaw bone density and morphology in bruxers using panoramic radiography. J Dent Sci. 2021;16:676–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2020.09.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.09.008
pubmed: 33854718
Nishio C, Tanimoto K, Hirose M, Horiuchi S, Kuroda S, Tanne K, et al. Stress analysis in the mandibular condyle during prolonged clenching: a theoretical approach with the finite element method. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2009;223:739–48. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544119JEIM485 .
doi: 10.1243/09544119JEIM485
pubmed: 19743639
Škaričić J, Čimić S, Kraljević-Šimunković S, Vuletić M, Dulčić N. Influence of occlusal splint on mandibular movements in patients with bruxism: a comparative pilot study. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2020;54:322–32. https://doi.org/10.15644/asc54/3/10 .
doi: 10.15644/asc54/3/10
pubmed: 33132395
pmcid: 7586893
Barrientos E, Pelayo F, Tanaka E, Lamela-Rey MJ, Fernández-Canteli A, de Vicente JC. Effects of loading direction in prolonged clenching on stress distribution in the temporomandibular joint. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2020;112: 104029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104029 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104029
pubmed: 32827997
Türp JC, Simonek M, Dagassan D. Bone apposition at the mandibular angles as a radiological sign of bruxism: a retrospective study. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01804-9 .
doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01804-9
Bertolini MM, Del Bel Cury AA, Pizzoloto L, Acapa IRH, Shibli JA, Bordin D. Does traumatic occlusal forces lead to peri-implant bone loss? A systematic review. Braz Oral Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0069 .
doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0069
pubmed: 31576953
Goodman CA, Hornberger TA, Robling AG. Bone and skeletal muscle: key players in mechanotransduction and potential overlapping mechanisms. Bone. 2015;80:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2015.04.014 .
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2015.04.014
pubmed: 26453495
pmcid: 4600534
Klemetti E, Kolmakov S, Kröger H. Pantomography in assessment of the osteoporosis risk group. Eur J Oral Sci. 1994;102:68–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1994.tb01156.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1994.tb01156.x
Pintado MR, Anderson GC, DeLong R, Douglas WH. Variation in tooth wear in young adults over a two-year period. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77:313–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70189-6 .
doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70189-6
pubmed: 9069087
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 .
doi: 10.2307/2529310
pubmed: 843571
Cianferotti L, Brandi ML. Muscle–bone interactions: basic and clinical aspects. Endocrine. 2014;45:165–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-013-0026-8 .
doi: 10.1007/s12020-013-0026-8
pubmed: 23990248
Frost HM. Wolff’s Law and bone’s structural adaptations to mechanical usage: an overview for clinicians. Angle Orthod. 1994;64:175–88.
pubmed: 8060014
Barnett E, Nordin B. The radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis: a new approach. Clin Radiol. 1960;11:166–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0009-9260(60)80012-8 .
doi: 10.1016/s0009-9260(60)80012-8
pubmed: 14408427
Dagistan S, Bilge O. Comparison of antegonial index, mental index, panoramic mandibular index and mandibular cortical index values in the panoramic radiographs of normal males and male patients with osteoporosis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39:290–4. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/46589325 .
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/46589325
pubmed: 20587653
pmcid: 3520250
Leite AF, de Souza Figueiredo PT, Barra FR, de Melo NS, de Paula AP. Relationships between mandibular cortical indexes, bone mineral density, and osteoporotic fractures in Brazilian men over 60 years old. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;112:648–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.06.014 .
doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.06.014
Eninanc I, Yeler DY, Cinar Z. Evaluation of the effect of bruxism on mandibular cortical bone using radiomorphometric indices on panoramic radiographs. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021;24:1742–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_71_21 .
doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_71_21
pubmed: 34782517
Xie Q, Soikkonen K, Wolf J, Mattila K, Gong M, Ainamo A. Effect of head positioning in panoramic radiography on vertical measurements: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1996;25:61–6. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.25.2.9446974 .
doi: 10.1259/dmfr.25.2.9446974
pubmed: 9446974
Stramotas S, Geenty JP, Petocz P, Darendeliler MA. Accuracy of linear and angular measurements on panoramic radiographs taken at various positions in vitro. Eur J Orthod. 2002;24:43–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/24.1.43 .
doi: 10.1093/ejo/24.1.43
pubmed: 11887378
Ledgerton D, Horner K, Devlin H, Worthington H. Radiomorphometric indices of the mandible in a British female population. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;28:173–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600435 .
doi: 10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600435
Gulsahi A, Yuzugullu B, Imirzalıoglu P, Genç Y. Assessment of panoramic radiomorphometric indices in Turkish patients of different age groups, gender and dental status. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37:288–92. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/19491030 .
doi: 10.1259/dmfr/19491030
pubmed: 18606751
Bozdag G, Sener S. The evaluation of MCI, MI, PMI and GT on both genders with different age and dental status. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140435. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20140435 .
doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20140435
pubmed: 26133366
pmcid: 5083898
Khan SIR, Rao D, Ramachandran A, Ashok BV. Comparison of bite force on the dominant and nondominant sides of patients with habitual unilateral chewing: a pilot study. Gen Dent. 2020;68(2):60–3.
pubmed: 32105229