Volume 12, Issue 3 (11-2024)
J Surg Trauma 2024, 12(3): 85-87 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ebrahimgol S, shahraki M, Amirpour haradasht S. Maxillofacial Patient Rehabilitation: How Can We Increase Maximum Interincisal Opening in Patients by Surgical Intervention?. J Surg Trauma 2024; 12 (3) :85-87
URL: http://jsurgery.bums.ac.ir/article-1-455-en.html
URL: http://jsurgery.bums.ac.ir/article-1-455-en.html
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran
Abstract: (895 Views)
Maximum Interincisal Opening (MIO) refers to the greatest distance between the upper and lower incisors when the mouth is opened fully. It is a measure of the range of motion in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and can provide insights into the function and health of the jaw. Following maxillofacial surgery, patients frequently experience restricted MIO for several reasons. Effective rehabilitation is essential for restoring both functional and esthetic outcomes. Normal MIO values generally range between 40 to 60 millimeters in adults. However, this can vary based on individual anatomy and age. Conditions leading to decreased MIO include temporomandibular joint disorders, muscle disorders, dental issues, trauma, orthodontic issues, infections, and systemic conditions. If a decrease in MIO is observed, it is often advisable to seek evaluation from a dental or medical professional to determine the underlying cause and appropriate treatment. This article discusses current strategies and advancements in the rehabilitation of MIO in patients who have undergone maxillofacial procedures.
Type of Study: Letter to Editor |
Subject:
Oral and Maxillofacial
Received: 2024/11/14 | Accepted: 2024/11/30 | ePublished ahead of print: 2024/12/21 | Published: 2025/01/4
Received: 2024/11/14 | Accepted: 2024/11/30 | ePublished ahead of print: 2024/12/21 | Published: 2025/01/4
References
1. Kumar A, Dutta S, Singh J, Mehta R, Hooda A, Namdev R. Clinical measurement of maximal mouth opening in children: a pioneer method. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2012;37(2):171-176. [DOI:10.17796/jcpd.37.2.l17x8227682j5610]
2. Szentpétery A. Clinical utility of mandibular movement ranges. J Orofac Pain. 1993;7(2):163-8.
3. Treat limited jaw opening in patients. BDJ In Practice. 2022;35(9):48. [DOI:10.1038/s41404-022-1729-4]
4. Costa YM, Porporatti AL, Stuginski-Barbosa J, Cassano DS, Bonjardim LR, Conti PCR. Coronoid process hyperplasia: an unusual cause of mandibular hypomobility. Braz Dent J. 2012;23:252-5. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-64402012000300012]
5. Mulder CH, Kalaykova SI, Gortzak RAT. Coronoid process hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature from 1995. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41(12):1483-1489. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2012.03.029]
6. Kim S-M, Lee J-H, Kim H-J, Huh J-K. Mouth opening limitation caused by coronoid hyperplasia: a report of four cases. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;40(6):301-307. [DOI:10.5125/jkaoms.2014.40.6.301]
7. Young AL. Internal derangements of the temporomandibular joint: A review of the anatomy, diagnosis, and management. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2015;15(1):2-7. [DOI:10.4103/0972-4052.156998]
8. Wright EF, North SL. Management and treatment of temporomandibular disorders: a clinical perspective. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17(4):247-254. [DOI:10.1179/106698109791352184]
9. Açikliği Ettma, Ve M, Ilişkisinin Tebi. Investigation Amount Of Maximum Mouth Opening And Association With Temporomandibular Joint Disorders In Turkish Adult Population.2013.
10. Janson M, Janson G, Sant'Ana E, Nakamura A, de Freitas MR. Segmental LeFort I osteotomy for treatment of a Class III malocclusion with temporomandibular disorder. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008;16(4):302-329. [DOI:10.1590/S1678-77572008000400014]
11. Aragon SB, Van Sickles JE, Dolwick MF, Flanary CM. The effects of orthognathic surgery on mandibular range of motion. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1985;43(12):938-943. [DOI:10.1016/0278-2391(85)90006-0]
12. Yazdani J, Ebrahimi H, Talesh KT, Khashabi E, Pourshahidi S, Tadbir AA. Comparing the Effect of 3 Orthognathic Surgical Methods on the Mandibular Range of Movement. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2010;21(3):703-705. [DOI:10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181d83fbc]
13. Ueki K, Marukawa K, Hashiba Y, Nakagawa K, Degerliyurt K, Yamamoto E. Assessment of the Relationship Between the Recovery of Maximum Mandibular Opening and the Maxillomandibular Fixation Period After Orthognathic Surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(3):486-491. [DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2007.08.044]
14. GC S. Clinical staging of oral submucous fibrosis: A review. International Journal of Oral-Medical Sciences. 2011;10(3):216-219. [DOI:10.5466/ijoms.10.216]
15. Balverdi M, Ghasemi T, Amirpour Haradasht S. Oral Submucous Fibrosis: a Premalignant Condition in a 22-Year-Old Iranian Man. WJPS. 2023;12(3):100-105. [DOI:10.61186/wjps.12.3.100]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Attribution-NoneCommercial CC BY-NC
