Finite element contact stress analysis of the temporomandibular joints of patients with temporomandibular disorders under mastication

In silico approach towards neuro‐occlusal rehabilitation for the early correction of asymmetrical development in a unilateral crossbite patient

“…This condylar pattern is in line with the one observed by other studies 6 and seems to be the reason for the lower gap for the disc on the balancing side 144 . In fact, as has been described in previous studies, 45,145 our results showed that the articular disc on the balancing side supports greater stresses than on the working side (see Figure 9). Besides, according to our results, usual chewing would not generate abnormal stresses in the TMJ disc of the XS side, which could justify that numerous clinical studies 143,146 have not found a direct relationship between UXB and temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs).…”

“…29 In particular, craniofacial biomechanics' studies use FE analysis mainly to quantify stresses and displacements in the skull, teeth, soft tissues or along the mandible. This method was first introduced into craniofacial research in 1973 38,39 and since then it has been extensively applied in several research topics to analyse the biomechanical response during the paediatric skull's growth, 31,[40][41][42][43][44] TMJ 45,46 or tooth movements, [47][48][49][50] head injuries, [51][52][53][54] the application of orthopaedic forces 55,56 or the inclusion of orthodontic implants, [57][58][59] brackets and wire. [60][61][62] Thereafter, many computational studies [29][30][31][32] have tried to explain the craniofacial growth according to the stresses and deformations of the tissues of the stomatognathic system.…”

The influence of maxillary incisor angles on the stress distributions of temporomandibular joints under incisal biting

“… 18 And the Young's modulus of the articular discs and the cartilages were assigned as 44.1 and 0.79 MPa, respectively 10,29 . The Poisson's ratios of the bony structures, articular discs, and cartilages were considered as 0.3, 0.4, and 0.49, respectively 12,24 . The interactions between the articular fossa‐eminence and the disc, between the condyle and the disc, and between the upper and lower teeth were taken as hard contact.…”

“…The maxillary incisal morphology and incisal biting condition would simultaneously affect the TMJ biomechanics. The incongruously biomechanical environment in the TMJ is the main pathogenic factor of TMD 24 . Therefore, it is necessary to explore how the morphology of the maxillary central incisors affects the stress distributions of the TMJs under incisal biting.…”

The biomechanical effects of bimaxillary osteotomies to the patients with mandibular retraction under incisal clenching

“…Abnormal stress distributions or overload could cause the structural damage within TMJ, such as disc perforation and condylar rupture [17,18]. And the biomechanical characteristics of the TMJs in the TMD patients was also different from those in the asymptomatic subjects [19]. The appropriate stress distribution of TMJ could promote the postoperative recovery and alleviate the TMD symptoms [20].…”