Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “MANDIBULAR CONDYLE”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources
PubMed1998

Drill-hole guide for internal fixation of fractures of the mandibular condyle.

We have developed a drill-hole guide valuable in accurately positioning the fracture of the mandibular ramus. It operates by introducing a Kirschner wire through the fracture stump from the mandibular angle to the condyle. A 2.0- to 2.4-mm-diameter Kirschner wire is drilled into the ramus from below and proceeds up to the condylar fragment through the stump of the fracture. With this guide, 15 patients with 23 subcondylar fractures underwent open reduction with Kirschner wire fixation. In each case, wire, by means of a pinning technique, was inserted accurately from the mandibular angle to the repositioned condyle.

Adult↗
PubMed1989

[Position changes of mandibular condyle in Herbst treatment. Radiographic study].

The study aimed to analyse the short- und long-term changes in condyle position in Class II/1 malocclusions treated with the Herbst appliance. Cephalometric reoentgenograms from a Herbst group (n = 30, mean age 12.1 years) were compared to those of a Control group (n = 12, mean age 11.0 years). The total observation period was 3 1/2 years. Centric occlusion and mouth open profile roentgenograms (to visualize the condyle) were analysed at four occasions. Mandibular tracings from the mouth open headfilms were superimposed on the centric occlusion headfilms using the Nasion-Sella-Line (NSL) for reference. NSL and its perpendicle NSLP through Sella (S) were used as a reference grid for linear measurements. When starting Herbst treatment the condyle was displaced 6 mm anteriorly and caudally. After 7 months of treatment the condyle was located 0.8 mm caudally to the pre-treatment position. No difference existed, however, between the Herbst and Control group. During the total observation period of 3 1/2 years the condyle in both examination groups moved caudally and posteriorly. This was thought to be a result of normal growth changes. It was concluded that Herbst treatment did not have an adverse effect on the position of the condyle.

Activator Appliances↗