A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A comparative study of condyle position in temporomandibular disorder patients with chewing side preference using cone-beam computed tomography. | LitMetric

Background: Chewing side preference (CSP) could cause structural and morphological changes of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and has been suggested as one aetiology of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), but the condylar position in TMD patients with CSP is unknown.

Objective: To compare the condylar position in the TMD patients with and without CSP.

Methods: Ninety TMD patients with unilateral symptom (69 with CSP and 21 without CSP) and 20 asymptomatic participants received cone-beam computed tomography. The condylar position was determined based on the measurements of sagittal joint spaces. Intergroup and intra-group comparisons of the condylar position were performed.

Results: The condyles in asymptomatic participants located nearly randomly in anterior, centric and posterior positions. Patients without CSP had significantly more posterior condyles than asymptomatic participants (57.1% vs 30.0%, p < 0.05). In patients with CSP, 50.7% of the condyles on the preferred chewing side and 42.0% on the unpreferred side located posteriorly, reaching no significant level compared with the asymptomatic participants and patients without CSP (p > 0.05). The symptomatic joints and asymptomatic joints in patients with CSP and without CSP showed no significant differences in condylar position. While patients without CSP had significantly more posterior condyles in symptomatic joints than asymptomatic participants (p < 0.05), patients with CSP showed a trend towards more posterior condyles in symptomatic joints compared with the asymptomatic participants (53.6% vs 30.0%, p = 0.054).

Conclusion: Condylar position is not a strong indicator to differentiate CSP-related TMDs from non-CSP-related TMDs. Posterior condyle could not be viewed as one indicator of TMD.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joor.13293DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

condylar position
20
patients csp
16
asymptomatic participants
16
tmd patients
12
chewing side
8
side preference
8
cone-beam computed
8
computed tomography
8
csp
8
position tmd
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!