ArticleORAL & implantology
Analysis of masseter deformation patterns during a maximum exertion clenching in patients with unilateral chewing.
Article in ORAL & implantology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the following study is to examine both masseter muscles (left/right) in a group of patients suffering from unilateral chewing during a maximum exertion isometric contraction using the deformation pattern analysis of ultrasound videos and compare them with the results obtained by studying patients with alternate bilateral chewing patterns. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study has been conducted by use of an ultrasound machine and a linear probe which allowed us to record a video (DCM) comprised of 45 frames per second (MicrUs ext-1H Telemed Medical Systems Milano) and a linear probe (L12-5l40S-3 5-12 MHz 40 mm). The probe was fixed to a brace and the patients were asked to clench their teeth as hard as possible, obtain the muscle's maximum exertion, for 5 seconds three times, with 30 seconds intervals in between. Both right and left masseter muscles were analyzed. We applied to the ultrasound video a dedicated software (Mudy 1.7.7.2 AMID Sulmona Italy) for the analysis of muscle deformation patterns. The total number of patients for this study is 150. Out of this number, 50 belong to Group A, mono lateral chewing on the left side arch, and 50 to Group B, mono lateral chewing on the right side arch. The remains patients belong to Group C, bilateral alternate chewing. The deformation pattern analysis of the skeletal muscles on ultrasound videos allows us to highlight with ease the clear difference in the clenching capabilities and strain management between the dominant masseter and the subordinate masseter in a unilaterally chewing patient.
resultsIn the sample investigated both in Group A and Group B the unilateral chewing is associated with a series of parameters (number, shape, volume, position and orientation of the teeth) and is also associated with the extension of the cutting surface really available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.