| Literature DB >> 27733873 |
Nicola Marchili1, Eleonora Ortu1, Davide Pietropaoli1, Ruggero Cattaneo1, Annalisa Monaco1.
Abstract
Stomatognathic system is strictly correlated to other anatomical regions; many studies investigated relationship between temporomandibular joint and posture, several articles describe cranio-facial pain from dental causes, such as trigger points. Until now less interest has been given to connections between dental occlusion and ophthalmology, even if they are important and involving. Clinical experience in dental practice claims that mandibular latero-deviation is connected both to eye dominance and to defects of ocular convergence. The trigeminal nerve is the largest and most complex of the twelve cranial nerves. The trigeminal system represents the connection between somitic structures and those derived from the branchial arches, collecting the proprioception from both somitic structures and oculomotor muscles. The intermedius nucleus of the medulla is a small perihypoglossal brainstem nucleus, which acts to integrate information from the head and neck and relays it on to the nucleus of the solitary tract where autonomic responses are generated. This intriguing neurophysiological web led our research group to investigate anatomical and functional associations between dental occlusion and vision. In conclusion, nervous system and functional pathways strictly connect vision and dental occlusion, and in the future both dentists and oculists should be more and more aware of this correlation for a better diagnosis and therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Cranial nerves; Dental occlusion; Mandibular latero-deviation; Ophthalmology; Trigeminal nerve
Year: 2016 PMID: 27733873 PMCID: PMC5045971 DOI: 10.2174/1874210601610010460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Dent J ISSN: 1874-2106
Electronic databases used and search strategy.
| Database | Search Strategy |
|---|---|
| Pubmed | Dental occlusion OR |
| Google Scholar | Pupil(s) OR |
| Scopus | Myopia OR |
Characteristics of the reviewed papers.
| Study | Sample Size | Study Design | Age | Sex |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 216 | 119 patients class I, 62 patients class II division 1, 15 patients class II division 2, 20 patients class III | 11.4 ± 1.2 years | 96 males, 120 females |
| [ | 146 | 122 patients Class I, 26 patients Class II.1, 9 patients Class II.2, 19 Class III; 39 patients with cross-bite and 137 without cross-bite | 12.4 ± 2.1 years | 65 males and 81 females |
| [ | 20 | 10 children with myopic defects | Mean age 9±8 months, between 7 and 13 years | |
| [ | 13 | Healthy subjects in habitual dental occlusion and stimulating ANS maintaining rest position | Mean age 27.1 ± 6.9 years | 5 females, 8 males |
| [ | 20 | 10 subjects wearing eyeglasses, 10 without sight defects | Mean age 21.5 ± 1.23 years | 12 females and 8 males |
| [ | 20 | 10 males with polysomnographic diagnoses | Mean age of study group 43.62±4.64 years | 20 males |
| [ | 36 | 18 females with myogenous TMD | Mean age 26.5±5.3 years | 36 females |
| [ | 40 | 20 RDC / TMD patients | Less than 30 years | 40 females |
| [ | 40 | 20 air force pilots 20 civilian pilots | Mean age 35.15 ± 8.14 years in air force group | 40 males |
| [ | 100 | 50 symptomatic patients with bilateral TMJ disc displacement | Study group: 13 men, 37 women; mean age, 28.84 ± 8.22 years | |
| [ | 120 | 60 presenting mandibular latero-deviation, 60 without functional mandibular laterodeviation | From 4 to 11 years (mean age 7 | Study group: 36 males, 24 females |
| [ | 36 | 18 permit holders shooters, 18 controls | 36 males | |
| [ | 50 | 25 TMD patients 25 non-TMD control subjects | Average age in TMD group: 31 years Average age in control group: 28 years | 50 females |
People investigated by selected works.
| Children | Adolescents | Adults | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Males | 72 | 161 | 139 |
| Females | 48 | 201 | 216 |
| Weighted mean age | 7.4 years | 11.8 years | 24.2 years |
Myopia had a significantly greater prevalence in Class II patients [35].
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n - % | n - % | n - % | n- % | P value | |
| Myopic | 21 - 9.7% | 42 - 19.4% | 6 - 2.7% | 3 - 1.3% | p<0.0001 |
| Non-myopic | 98 - 45.3% | 20 - 9.25% | 9 - 4.1% | 17 - 7.8% | p<0.005 |
The clinician should realize that with activation of the RME appliance he/she is also forces on other structures that may or may not be beneficial for the patient [42].
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Internasal | 55.4 | 7.22 | 19.18 |
| Nasofrontal | 32.7 | 8.13 | 15.82 |
| Nasomaxillary | 25.6 | 12.8 | 19.46 |
| Frontomaxillary | 9.38 | 8.11 | 8.67 |
| Zygomaticomaxillary | 8.95 | 2.85 | 5.71 |
| Zygomaticofrontal | 33.0 | 4.11 | 14.42 |
| Zygomaticotemporal | 9.27 | 1.99 | 5.24 |
Computational result of the Von-Mises stress distribution on the various sutures of the craniofacial complex following 5 mm of transverse expansion.