Digital evaluation of occlusal forces: comparison between healthy subjects and TMD patients

Piccoli, Luca; Migliau, G; Besharat, Laith Konstantinos; Carlo, Stefano Di; Pompa, Giorgio; Giorgio, Roberto Di

doi:10.11138/ads/2017.8.2.079

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is critical in terms of the biofuntionality of the posterior restorations that are primarily designed for the functional mastication instead of esthetics [ 20 , 21 ]. The molars are subjected to significantly higher occlusal forces ranging from 300 Newton’s (N) to 800 N compared to the anterior teeth that are subjected to 60 N to 200 N. In fact, the occlusal loads can reach up to 1000 N in certain individuals with parafunctional habits [ 22 , 23 ]. Nevertheless, the data available on the survival rates and complications of Zr FPDs is sparse and controversial, due to the variations in the study designs and variables [ 24 , 25 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Load of CAD/CAM Fabricated Cantilever Implant-Supported Zirconia Framework: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fracture resistance of computer-aided designing and computer-aided manufacturing CAD/CAM fabricated implant-supported cantilever zirconia frameworks (ISCZFs) is affected by the size/dimension and the micro cracks produced from diamond burs during the milling process. The present in vitro study investigated the fracture load for different cross-sectional dimensions of connector sites of implant-supported cantilever zirconia frameworks (ISCZFs) with different cantilever lengths (load point). A total of 48 ISCZFs (Cercon, Degudent; Dentsply, Deutschland, Germany) were fabricated by CAD/CAM and divided into four groups based on cantilever length and reinforcement of distal-abutment: Group A: 9 mm cantilever; Group B: 9 mm cantilever with reinforced distal-abutment; Group C: 12 mm cantilever; Group D: 12 mm cantilever with reinforced distal-abutment (n = 12). The ISCZFs were loaded using a universal testing machine for recording the fracture load. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and Tukey’s test were used for the statistical analysis (p < 0.05). Significant variations were found between the fracture loads of the four ISCZFs (p = 0.000); Group-C and B were found with the weakest and the strongest distal cantilever frameworks with fracture load of 670.39 ± 130.96 N and 1137.86 ± 127.85 N, respectively. The mean difference of the fracture load between groups A (810.49 + 137.579 N) and B (1137.86 ± 127.85 N) and between C (670.39 ± 130.96 N) and D (914.58 + 149.635 N) was statistically significant (p = 0.000). Significant variations in the fracture load between the ISCZFs with different cantilever lengths and thicknesses of the distal abutments were found. Increasing the thickness of the distal abutment only by 0.5 mm reinforces the distal abutments by significantly increasing the fracture load of the ISCZFs. Therefore, an increase in the thickness of the distal abutments is recommended in patients seeking implant-supported distal cantilever fixed prostheses.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Load of CAD/CAM Fabricated Cantilever Implant-Supported Zirconia Framework: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with healthy subjects, patients with TMD have been revealed to have a more forward position of the occlusal force center and reduced occlusal forces on the first (6.9%) and second (27%) molars. 35 In addition, those with TMJ pain showed a significantly longer distance from the occlusal force center and a significantly higher asymmetry index of the maximum occlusal load. 36 Compared with those in the NOB group, patients in the OB group had a significantly higher force in the molar region ( p = 0.007) but significantly lower forces in the anterior ( p = 0.000) and premolar ( p = 0.038) regions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Comparison of Occlusal Parameters between Open Bite and Nonopen Bite Patients Using the T-Scan III System: A Pilot Study

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate and compare the first tooth contact region, occlusion time, time to generate total force, and force distribution between open bite (OB) and non-OB (NOB) patients at the maximum intercuspation position using the T-Scan III system. Materials and Methods Sixteen patients were divided into the OB and NOB groups (n = 8 for each group). The T-Scan III system was used to evaluate the first tooth contact region, occlusion time, time to generate total force, and force distribution. Statistical Analysis The mean patient age, overjet, overbite, occlusion time, and time to generate total force were compared between the groups by independent samples t-test. Relative force distributions between groups and among regions were compared by the Mann–Whitney U- and Kruskal–Wallis H-tests, respectively. A probability value of less than 5% (p < 0.05) was considered significant. Results Differences in the first tooth contact region between groups were observed. The molar region was the first tooth contact region in the OB group, while first tooth contact was observed in all regions in the NOB group. Neither the occlusion time nor the time to generate total force was significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05). The highest force distributions were observed in the molar regions in both groups. Significant intragroup differences were found among all regions (p < 0.05), except between the anterior and premolar regions in the NOB group (p = 0.317). Intergroup differences in the force distributions in the anterior (p = 0.000), premolar (p = 0.038), and molar (p = 0.007) regions were significant. Conclusion Unlike in the NOB group, in which first tooth contact occurred in every region, in the OB group, first tooth contact occurred only in the molar region. Compared with those in the NOB group, the force distributions in the OB group were approximately 1.5 times higher in the molar region but were significantly lower in the anterior and premolar regions.

show abstract

“…Ferrato et al. 18 stated that occlusal forces are more pronounced in the mandibular molars than in the maxillary molars. According to a study by Romeed et al., 19 the occlusal forces generated during normal oral functions are more concentrated at the buccal cervical region of enamel and decrease considerably at the dentin, cementum, and periodontal ligament.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of transpalatal arch and vertical holding appliance at different heights

Nayak

Nanda

Sinha

et al. 2022

Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital evaluation of occlusal forces: comparison between healthy subjects and TMD patients

Cited by 13 publications

References 14 publications

Fracture Load of CAD/CAM Fabricated Cantilever Implant-Supported Zirconia Framework: An In Vitro Study

Fracture Load of CAD/CAM Fabricated Cantilever Implant-Supported Zirconia Framework: An In Vitro Study

Comparison of Occlusal Parameters between Open Bite and Nonopen Bite Patients Using the T-Scan III System: A Pilot Study

Comparative evaluation of transpalatal arch and vertical holding appliance at different heights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About