Search Results

1 - 10 of 168 items :

Clear All

:351-357. 5. Teng MS, Futran ND. Osteoradionecrosis of the mandible. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2005; 13(4):217-221. 6. Curi MM, Dib LL. Osteoradionecrosis of the jaws: a retrospective study of the background factors and treatment in 104 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1997; 55(6):540-544. 7. Tsai CJ, Hofstede TM, Sturgis EM, Garden AS, Lindberg ME, Wei Q, et al. Osteora-dionecrosis and radiation dose to the mandible in patients with oropharyngeal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2013; 1:415-420. 8. Guimarães EP, Rafaelly de Oliveira Pedreira F, Correia Jham

References 1. Egbert M, Stoelinga PJ, Blijdrop PA, de Koomen HA . The “threepiece” osteotomy and interpositional bone graft for augmentation of the atrophic mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg , 1986; 44:680-687. 2. Lew D, Hinkle R, Unhold G, Shroyer J III, Stutes R . Reconstruction of the severely atrophic edentulous mandible by means of autogenous bone grafts and simultaneous placement of osseointegrated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg , 1991; 49:228-233. 3. Quinn P, Kent K, MacAfee K II . Reconstructing the atrophic mandible with inferior border grafting

References 1. Sekerci AE SY, Etoz M, Aksu Y. Aberrant location of salivary gland inclusion: Report of a case with review of the literature. Eur J Rad Extra, 2011;79:27-31. 2. Shimizu M, Osa N, Okamura K, Yoshiura K. Ct analysis of the stafne’s bone defects of the mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 2006;35:95-102. 3. Solomon LW, Pantera EA Jr, Monaco E, White SC, Suresh L. A diagnostic challenge: Anterior variant of mandibular lingual bone depression. Gen Dent, 2006;54:336-340. 4. de Courten A, Kuffer R, Samson J, Lombardi T. Anterior lingual mandibular salivary

of mandible and lumbar spine in a group of women receiving hormone replacement therapy. Eur J Oral Sci 1996, 104, 10-16. 12. Jeffcoat M.K., Lewis C.E., Reddy M.S., Wang C.Y., Redford M.: Post-menopausal bone loss and its relationship to oral bone loss. Periodontol 2000 2000, 23, 94-102. 13. Kim H.J., Zhao H., Kitaura H., Bhattacharyya S., Brewer J.A., Muglia L.J., Ross F.P., Teitelbaum S.L.: Dexamethsone suppresses bone formation via the osteoclast. Adv Exp Med Biol 2007, 602, 43-46. 14. Kribbs P.J: Two-year change in mandibular bone mass in an osteoporotic

integrated soft ware package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources , 11, 353–357. Klingenberg, C. P., Leamy, L. J., Cheverud, J. M. 2004. Integration and modularity of quantitative trait locus effects on geometric shape in the mouse mandible. Genetics , 166, 1909–1921. Klingenberg, C. P., Gidaszewski, N. A. 2010. Testing and quantifying phylogenetic signals and homoplasy in morphometric data. Systematic Biology , 59, 245–261. Klingenberg, C. P., Marugán-Lobón, J. 2013. Evolutionary covariation in geometric morphometric data: analyzing integration

REFERENCES 1. Martini L, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Giardino R: Sheep model in orthopedic research: A literature review. Comparative Med 2001, 51(4): 292-299. 2. Neyt JGV, Buckwalter JA, Carroll NC: Use of animal models in musculoskeletal research. Iowa Orthop J 1998, 18: 119-123. 3. Campillo VE, Langonnet S, Pierrefeu A, Chaux-Bodard AG: Anatomic and histological study of the rabbit mandible as an experimental model for wound healing and surgical therapies. Lab Anim 2014, 48(4): 273-277. 4. Akbulut Y, Demiraslan Y, Gürbüz İ, Aslan K: The effect of gender factor on the


The aim of the paper is to obtain the values of dental implant stress analysis. The dental implant was inserted in the part of mandible bone. Stress analysis was carried out using the Finite Elements Method and simplified models.

1994;77(4):373-86. 5. Shetty Devi C, Urs Aadithya B, Ahuja P, et al. Aggressive fi bromatosis of anterior maxilla. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2011;15(1):85-7. 6. Lee J, Thomas JM, Phillips S, et al. Aggressive fi bromatosis: MRI features with pathologic correlation. Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(1):247-54. 7. Seper L, Burger H, Vormoor J, et al. Aggressive fi bromatosis involving the mandible - case report and review of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 2005;99(1):30-8. 8. Janinis J, Patriki M, Vini L, et al. The pharmacological treatment of aggressive fi

al.: Dziewiątki - atawizm zębowy? Twój Prz. Stomatol., 3, 60-63, 2008. 10. Shultsman M., Taicher S.: Fourth molars in the maxilla and mandible - a rare phenomenon. Refuat. Hapeh. Vehashinayim., 20, 2, 35-37, 2003. 11. Zadurska M. et al.: Nadliczbowość zębów - na podstawie piśmiennictwa. Czas. Stomat., 58, 4, 265-272, 2005. 12. Zappa J., Cieślik T.: Zatrzymane czwarte zęby trzonowe w żuchwie i szczęce - opis przypadku. Dent. Forum, 34, 1, 91-94, 2006.


Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of inclusion of lower and upper third molar in the population of Mures county.

Materials and Methods: For this study, we examined the orthopantomograms (OPGs) of 243 patients (including 138 women and 105 men, aged 19-57 years old) who had impacted third molars and who presented to three Orthodontic Clinics in Tîrgu Mureș between 2015-2017. All impacted third molars were taken into consideration but which at the same time presented fully developed roots. We excluded from the study patients with pathological condition or craniofacial syndromes such as cleidocranial dysostosis and Down syndrome.

Results: In both women and men, the most common cases were of one impacted molar (61,72%), then two (27,16%) and three (11,12%) impacted molars. Based on the evaluation of all radiographs, 363 impacted teeth were observed, with a higher proportion in women (54,27%) compared to men (45,73%). With regard to the location of the impacted teeth in the mandible or the maxilla, in both female and male patients, the incidence of mandibular impactions was higher (62,25%) than in the maxilla (37,75%). Regarding the link between the position on the arch (right and left side) and the localization of the impacted teeth, in female patients we can assert that while the mandible had the largest number of impacted teeth on the right side (69,35%), the impacted teeth in the maxilla were more numerous on the left side (60,27%) (p=0,00004). In male patients, regardless of whether the impactions were in the mandible or in the maxilla, they were more frequent on the right side (70,58% in mandible and 76,56% in maxilla) than on the left one.


1. The incidence of impacted wisdom teeth is higher in females compared to males.

2. Impacted wisdom teeth are more common on lower arch than on upper arch.

3. In female patients, the prevalence of impaction is higher on the right side in the mandible and on the left side in the maxilla

4. In male patients, the prevalence of impaction on the right side is higher in both mandible and maxilla