| Literature DB >> 29898176 |
Lígia Maria Napolitano Gonçalves1, Marcelo Palinkas1,2, Jaime Eduardo Cecilio Hallak3, Wilson Marques Júnior3, Paulo Batista de Vasconcelos1, Nicolly Parente Ribeiro Frota1, Isabela Hallak Regalo1, Selma Siéssere1, Simone Cecilio Hallak Regalo1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the molar bite force, electromyographic activity, chewing efficiency and thickness of the masseter and temporalis muscles in individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and healthy individuals.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29898176 PMCID: PMC5963914 DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2017-0408
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Appl Oral Sci ISSN: 1678-7757 Impact factor: 2.698
Comparison of the mean age and anthropometric measurement according to the groups. ALSG: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis group; CG: control group. t test (p≤0.05)
| Anthropometric Measurement | ALSG | CG | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 42.13±4.09 | 43.33±3.93 | 0.83 |
| Weight (Kg) | 73.46±4.44 | 71.09±3.05 | 0.66 |
| Height (cm) | 1.63±0.03 | 1.67±0.03 | 0.51 |
Comparison of the mean normalized electromyographic data during mandibular task according to the groups. ALSG: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis group; CG: control group; SD: standard deviation; RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter; RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal. Statistical significance was calculated using t test (p≤0.05). Significant p-values are indicated in bold
| Mandibular task | Muscles | ALSG | CG | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rest | RM | 0.16±0.06 | 0.05±0.01 |
|
| LM | 0.18±0.06 | 0.05±0.01 |
| |
| RT | 0.12±0.02 | 0.08±0.01 | 0.19 | |
| LT | 0.13±0.03 | 0.07±0.01 | 0.08 | |
| Right laterality | RM | 0.36±0.07 | 0.12±0.02 | 0.14 |
| LM | 0.40±0.06 | 0.08±0.01 | 0.41 | |
| RT | 0.34±0.05 | 0.18±0.03 | 0.61 | |
| LT | 0.19±0.05 | 0.12±0.02 | 0.74 | |
| Left laterality | RM | 0.31±0.06 | 0.09±0.02 | 0.001 |
| LM | 0.41±0.08 | 0.09±0.02 | 0.001 | |
| RT | 0.16±0.03 | 0.17±0.03 | 0.08 | |
| LT | 0.32±0.07 | 0.17±0.03 | 0.002 | |
| Protrusion | RM | 0.44±0.07 | 0.23±0.05 | 0.16 |
| LM | 0.45±0.07 | 0.12±0.02 | 0.001 | |
| RT | 0.19±0.03 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.001 | |
| LT | 0.23±0.06 | 0.10±0.02 |
| |
| Dental clenching Parafilm M® | RM | 0.76±0.06 | 0.61±0.07 | 0.43 |
| LM | 0.77±0.08 | 0.60±0.08 | 0.88 | |
| RT | 0.80±0.05 | 0.84±0.09 | 0.68 | |
| LT | 0.78±0.08 | 0.76±0.08 | 0.60 |
Figure 1Normalized electromyography data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the rest. *statistically significant difference (p≤0.05)
Figure 5Normalized electromyography data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the dental clenching Parafilm M®
Comparison of the mean habitual and non-habitual chewing data according to the groups. ALSG: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis group; CG: control group; SD: standard deviation; RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter; RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal. Statistical significance was calculated using t test (p≤0.05). Significant p-values are indicated in bold
| Chewing | Muscles | ALSG | CG | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peanuts | RM | 0.95±0.21 | 1.34±0.25 | 0.50 |
| LM | 0.96±0.17 | 1.44±0.21 | 0.24 | |
| RT | 0.64±0.09 | 1.00±0.12 | 0.28 | |
| LT | 0.71±0.13 | 1.19±0.20 | 0.18 | |
| Raisins | RM | 0.66±0.12 | 1.01±0.16 | 0.84 |
| LM | 0.71±0.12 | 0.84±0.16 | 0.64 | |
| RT | 0.57±0.09 | 0.83±0.11 | 0.30 | |
| LT | 0.68±0.11 | 0.91±0.15 | 0.12 | |
| Parafilm M® | RM | 0.79±0.08 | 1.27±0.06 |
|
| LM | 0.90±0.05 | 1.35±0.06 | 0.06 | |
| RT | 0.69±0.04 | 0.91±0.04 |
| |
| LT | 0.82±0.04 | 0.95±0.04 | 0.91 |
Figure 6Normalized electromyography data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the chewing with peanuts
Figure 8Normalized electromyography data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the chewing with Parafilm M®. *statistically significant difference (p≤0.05)
Comparison of the mean masticatory muscle thickness (cm) during mandibular task according to the groups. ALSG: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis group; CG: control group; SD: standard deviation; RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter; RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal. Statistical significance was calculated using t test (p≤0.05). Significant p-values are indicated in bold
| Mandibular task and Muscles | ALSG | CG | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rest | |||
| RM | 0.95±0.04 | 0.97±0.05 | 0.63 |
| LM | 0.99±0.05 | 0.98±0.04 | 0.70 |
| RT | 0.56±0.08 | 0.43±0.04 | 0.10 |
| LT | 0.47±0.05 | 0.42±0.04 | 0.11 |
| Dental Clenching | |||
| RM | 1.26±0.05 | 1.26±0.06 | 0.43 |
| LM | 1.34±0.06 | 1.24±0.07 | 0.41 |
| RT | 0.61±0.08 | 0.58±0.05 | 0.14 |
| LT | 0.55±0.06 | 0.52±0.04 | 0.31 |
Figure 9Masticatory muscle’ thickness data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the rest
Figure 10Masticatory muscle thickness data of masseter (RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter) and temporalis (RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal) muscles for CG and ALSG in the dental clenching
Comparison of the mean bite force (N) according to the groups. ALSG: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis group; CG: control group; SD: standard deviation; RM: right masseter; LM: left masseter; RT: right temporal; LT: left temporal. Statistical significance was calculated using t test (p≤0.05)
| Bite Force | ALSG | CG | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right Molar | 203.68±31.08 | 229.68±29.32 | 0.553 |
| Left Molar | 230.75±34.22 | 232.41±27.65 | 0.970 |
Figure 11Maximum molar bite force data of CG and ALSG (right molar and left molar)