Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÇϾǰñ °ñÀýȯÀÚÀÇ ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀý °ñ º¯È­¿¡ °üÇÑ ´ÜÃþ¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐÀû ¿¬±¸

A TOMOGRAPHIC STUDY OF BONY CHANGES OF TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINTS IN MANDIBULAR FRACTURED PATIENTS

Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼± 1991³â 21±Ç 2È£ p.341 ~ 351
³ª½Â¸ñ, Á¶ÀÎÈ£,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
³ª½Â¸ñ (  ) - ÀüºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç
Á¶ÀÎÈ£ (  ) - ÀüºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç

Abstract

1982³â 1¿ùºÎÅÍ 1990³â 6¿ù±îÁö 8³â 6°³¿ù µ¿¾È ÀüºÏ´ëÇб³ º´¿ø Ä¡°ú¿¡ ¾È¸é°ñ °ñÀý°ú
º¹ÇÕµÇÁö ¾ÊÀº ÇϾǰñ °ñÀý·Î ÀÔ¿øÇÏ¿© °üÇ÷Àû Á¤º¹¼úÀ» ¹ÞÀº ȯÀÚÁß ÃßÀû°¡´ÉÇÑ 58¸í (³²
ÀÚ 55¸í, ¿©ÀÚ 3¸í)À» ¿¬±¸´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÃÖ¼Ò ¼úÈÄ 6°³¿ù¿¡¼­ ÃÖ´ë ¼ú ÈÄ 8³â 6°³¿ù±îÁö ÀçÁ¶»ç
ÇÏ¿© Ãø¹æ´ÜÃþ»çÁø ¹× µÎºÎ±Ô°Ý ÈÄÀü ¹æ»ç¼±»çÁøÀ» ȯ¿µÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ÀçÁ¶»ç ±â°£ÀÌ 6°³¿ù¿¡¼­
1³â±îÁö¸¦ Group ¥°, 1³â¿¡¼­ 2³â±îÁö Group ¥±, 2³â¿¡¼­ 4³â±îÁö¸¦ Group ¥², 4³â ÀÌ»óÀ»
Group ¥³·Î ÀçÁ¶»ç±â°£¿¡ µû¶ó 4GroupsÀ¸·Î ³ª´©¾î ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀýÀÇ °ñ º¯È­ ¹× ¾È¸ð ºñ´ë
ĪÀ» °üÂû ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù
1. ÇϾǰúµÎÀÇ °ñº¯È­´Â ÃÑ 116°úµÎÁß 56¿¹ (48.4%)¿¡¼­ ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, ÆíÆòÈ­(flattening)°¡
38¿¹, °ñÁõ½Äü(osteophytes)°¡ 14¿¹, ÇÇÁú°ñ°á¼Õ(erosion)ÀÌ 3¿¹, °ñ°æÈ­(sclerosis)°¡ 1¿¹ÀÌ
¾ú´Ù. ÆíÆòÈ­´Â Group ¥°ÀÌ 27.8%, ¥±°¡ 37.5%, ¥²°¡ 35.7, ¥³°¡ 32.1%À̾úÀ¸¸ç, °ñÁõ½Äü´Â
Group ¥°ÀÌ 11.1%, ¥±°¡ 8.3%, ¥²°¡ 7.1%, ¥³°¡21 4%À̾ú°í, ÇÇÁú°ñ°á¼ÕÀº Group ¥±¿Í ¥²
¿¡¼­ °¢°¢ 4.2%, 7.1%À̾úÀ¸³ª Group ¥°°ú ¥³¿¡¼­´Â ³ªÅ¸³ªÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ °ñ °æÈ­´Â
Group ¥²(3.6%)¿¡¼­¸¸ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
2. °üÀý¿ÍÀÇ °ñº¯È­´Â ÃÑ 116°üÀýÁß 18(15.5%)¿¡¼­ ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç ÆíÆòÈ­°¡ 14¿¹, °ñ°æÈ­°¡ 4
¿¹À̾ú´Ù. ÆíÆòÈ­´Â Group ¥°ÀÌ 2.8%, ¥±°¡ 4.2%, ¥²°¡ 10.7%, ¥³°¡ 17.9%À̾ú°í °ñ°æÈ­´Â
Group ¥° of 5.6%, ¥²¿Í ¥³°¡ °¢°¢ 3.6%À̾úÀ¸³ª Group ¥±¿¡¼­´Â ³ªÅ¸³ªÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.
3. ¾È¸ðºñ´ëĪ Á¤µµ´Â Æò±Õ 2.81¡¾2.20§®À̾úÀ¸¸ç, Group ¥°ÀÌ 3.06¡¾1.93§®, ¥±°¡ 2.38¡¾
2.44§®, ¥²°¡ 2.74¡¾1.19§®, ¥³°¡ 2.93¡¾2.93§®À̾ú´Ù.
4. ÇϾǰñ °ñÀý½Ã °üÇ÷ÀûÁ¤º¹¼ú ÈÄ °úµÎ°ñº¯È­¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Group°£ ºñ±³¿¡¼­´Â Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇ
¼ºÀÌ ÀÎÁ¤µÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù(x2-Test, p>0.05).

The purpose of this study was to aid in the evaluation of prognosis of
temporomandibular joint after open reduction of fractured mandible.
The author studied the bony changes (remodelling) of 116 temporomandibular joints
and facial asymmetry in 58 patients. Subjects were divided into 4 Groups according to
the follow up periods after open reduction of fractured mandible . The bony changes and
facial asymmetry were observed on lateral tomograms and cephalometric posteroanterior
skull radiograms.
The results were as follows :
1. The bony changes of condyles were observed in 56 cases (38 flattening, 14
osteophyte, 3 erosion, 1 sclerosis). Flattening was observed in 32.8% (Group ¥° 27.8%,
Group ¥± 37.59, Group ¥² 35.7%, Group ¥³ 32.1%). Osteophyte was observed in 12.1%
(Group ¥° 11.1%, Group ¥± 8.3%, Group ¥² 7.1%, Group ¥³ 21.4%). Erosion and sclerosis
were observed in 2.6%, 0.9%, respectively.
2. The bony changes of articular fossa were observed in 18 cases (15.5%). Flattening
was observed in 12.1% (Group ¥° 2.8%, Group ¥± 4.2%, Group ¥² 10.7%, Group ¥³
17.9%). Sclerosis was observed in 3.4% (Group 15.6%, Group ¥² 3.6%, Group ¥³ 3.6%).
3. The amount of facial asymmetry was 2.81¡¾2.20§® (Group ¥° 3.0¡¾1.93§®, Group ¥±
2.38¡¾2.44§®, Group ¥² 2.14¡¾1.19§®, Group ¥³2.93¡¾2.93§®).
4. There was no significant difference between all groups according to bony changes
of temporomandibular joints after open reduction of fractured mandibles
(x2-Test, p > 0.05).

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸