J Wang1, J P Chen1, Y Wang1, X L Xu1, C B Guo1. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical characteristics of mandibular movement and masticatory muscle function in preoperative and postoperative patients with unilateral mandibular tumors in the region of mandibular body and ramus by combining digital mandibular movement records with electromyography, and to preliminarily explore the relationship and mechanism between movement and masticatory muscle function. METHODS: Six preoperative patients with tumor in unilateral body and ramus of mandible were included, and three postoperative patients with unilateral segmental resection and reconstruction of mandibular bone were included. The mandibular movement recording system and surface electromyography system were used to collect the movement trajectory of the patients' mandibular marginal movement and chewing movement, and the surface electromyography of bilateral masseter and temporalis was recorded concurrently. The surface electromyography of bilateral masseter and temporalis was collected when the patients were at relaxation and at maximal voluntary clenching (MVC). The motion trajectory was observed on the digital virtual model, and the motion amplitude and direction of mandibular marginal movements were analyzed. The characteristics of masticatory electromyogram (EMG) activity in affected and unaffected sides at relaxation, MVC and bilateral mastication were analyzed, and the asymmetry indexes and activity indexes were calculated. RESULTS: The preoperative mean maximum opening of the patients was (35.20±6.87) mm. Three patients had mild mouth opening limitation, and all the patients' mouth opening trajectory was skewed to the affected side. During lateral movements, the mean range of motion of the affected side [(10.34±1.27) mm] and that of the healthy side [(6.94±2.41) mm] were significantly different. The maximum opening of the postoperative patients was (30.65±17.32) mm, and the mandibular marginal movement characteristics were consistent with those of the patients before surgery. During MVC in the preoperative patients, the median EMG activities of the masseter muscle [44.20 (5.70, 197.90) μV] and the temporalis muscle [42.15 (22.90, 155.00) μV] on the affected side were slightly lower than those of the masseter [45.60 (7.50, 235.40) μV] and the temporalis muscle [63.30 (44.10, 126.70) μV] on the healthy side. In the postoperative patients, individualized changes occurred. Some patients suffered from weakened electromyographic activity on the affected side, while some other ones showed hyperelectromyographic activity on the affected side. CONCLUSION: Both benign and malignant tumors as well as their surgery can cause abnormal mandibular movements and change of electromyographic activity of bilateral masseter and temporalis muscles.
OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical characteristics of mandibular movement and masticatory muscle function in preoperative and postoperative patients with unilateral mandibular tumors in the region of mandibular body and ramus by combining digital mandibular movement records with electromyography, and to preliminarily explore the relationship and mechanism between movement and masticatory muscle function. METHODS: Six preoperative patients with tumor in unilateral body and ramus of mandible were included, and three postoperative patients with unilateral segmental resection and reconstruction of mandibular bone were included. The mandibular movement recording system and surface electromyography system were used to collect the movement trajectory of the patients' mandibular marginal movement and chewing movement, and the surface electromyography of bilateral masseter and temporalis was recorded concurrently. The surface electromyography of bilateral masseter and temporalis was collected when the patients were at relaxation and at maximal voluntary clenching (MVC). The motion trajectory was observed on the digital virtual model, and the motion amplitude and direction of mandibular marginal movements were analyzed. The characteristics of masticatory electromyogram (EMG) activity in affected and unaffected sides at relaxation, MVC and bilateral mastication were analyzed, and the asymmetry indexes and activity indexes were calculated. RESULTS: The preoperative mean maximum opening of the patients was (35.20±6.87) mm. Three patients had mild mouth opening limitation, and all the patients' mouth opening trajectory was skewed to the affected side. During lateral movements, the mean range of motion of the affected side [(10.34±1.27) mm] and that of the healthy side [(6.94±2.41) mm] were significantly different. The maximum opening of the postoperative patients was (30.65±17.32) mm, and the mandibular marginal movement characteristics were consistent with those of the patients before surgery. During MVC in the preoperative patients, the median EMG activities of the masseter muscle [44.20 (5.70, 197.90) μV] and the temporalis muscle [42.15 (22.90, 155.00) μV] on the affected side were slightly lower than those of the masseter [45.60 (7.50, 235.40) μV] and the temporalis muscle [63.30 (44.10, 126.70) μV] on the healthy side. In the postoperative patients, individualized changes occurred. Some patients suffered from weakened electromyographic activity on the affected side, while some other ones showed hyperelectromyographic activity on the affected side. CONCLUSION: Both benign and malignant tumors as well as their surgery can cause abnormal mandibular movements and change of electromyographic activity of bilateral masseter and temporalis muscles.
Authors: M L Urken; D Buchbinder; H Weinberg; C Vickery; A Sheiner; R Parker; J Schaefer; P Som; A Shapiro; W Lawson Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 1991-09 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: M Caron; M Auclair; B Donadille; V Béréziat; B Guerci; M Laville; H Narbonne; C Bodemer; O Lascols; J Capeau; C Vigouroux Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2007-07-06 Impact factor: 15.828