Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼Ò¾Æ¿¡¼­ °ñÀýµÈ ÇϾǰúµÎÀÇ °ñ°³Á¶ ¾ç»ó¿¡ °üÇÑ ÀÓ»ó ¹× ¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐÀû ¿¬±¸

A Clinico-Radiologic Study Of Bony Remodeling Of The Fractured Condyles In Children

Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼± 1995³â 25±Ç 2È£ p.471 ~ 482
Á¶Á¤½Å, ¹Úâ¼­,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¶Á¤½Å (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³
¹Úâ¼­ (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐ

Abstract

ÀúÀÚ´Â 19%6³â 1¿ùºÎÅÍ 1994³â 10¿ù±îÁö ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº´¿ø¿¡ ³»¿øÇÏ¿© ÇϾǰúµÎ °ñÀý
·Î Áø´Ü ¹ÞÀº 15¼¼ ÀÌÇÏÀÇ È¯ÀÚÁß¿¡¼­ ºñ°üÇ÷Àû óġ¸¦ ¹ÞÀº 23¸í, 26°³ °úµÎ¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î
°úµÎ °ñÀý¿¡ °üÇÑ ÀÓ»ó, ¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐÀû °íÂûÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù
1. °úµÎ °ñÀý ȯÀÚÀÇ ³²³à ºñÀ²Àº 1 : 0.9·Î ¼ºº°¿¡ µû¸¥ ¹ß»ý·üÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ´Â º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÀ¸
¸ç, ¿¬·Éº°·Î´Â ¹ÌÃëÇбâ¿Í ÃëÇб⠾Ƶ¿±ºÀÇ ºñ±³½Ã, ¹ÌÃëÇб⠾Ƶ¿±º(83%)¿¡¼­ ´õ ¸¹ÀÌ ¹ß
»ýÇÏ¿´´Ù.
2. °ñÀýÀÇ ¿øÀÎÀº Ã߶ô»ç°í(5B%)°¡ °¡Àå ¸¹¾Ò°í, ±× ¿Ü¿¡ ±³Åë»ç°í, ¹Ì²ô·¯Áü¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ °æ
¿ì·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
3 .°ñÀý¿¡ µû¸¥ ÀÓ»óÁõ»óÀº ÃËÁø½Ã ¾ÐÅë(19·Ê)°ú, °³±¸Àå¾Ö(17·Ê)°¡ ¸¹ÀÌ ³ªÅ¸³µ°í, ºÎÁ¾(7
·Ê), ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕ(3·Ê) µîµµ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.
4. °ñÀý ºÎÀ§º°·Î´Â ÆíÃø¼º °ñÀýÀÌ 20¸í, ¾çÃø¼º °ñÀýÀÌ 3¸íÀ¸·Î ÃÑ23¸í¿¡¼­ °úµÎ°ñÀýÀ»
°üÂûÇÏ¿´°í, °ñÀý ºÐÆ÷·Î´Â °úµÎ ´Üµ¶°ñÀýÀÌ 10¸í(44%)À̾úÀ¸¸ç, °úµÎ ¹× ÇϾǰáÇպΠµ¿¹Ý
°ñÀýÀÌ 9¸í(39%), °úµÎ ¹× »óÇàÁö µ¿¹Ý°ñÀý 2¸í(9%), °úµÎ ¹× ÇϾÇü µ¿¹Ý°ñÀý°ú °úµÎ ¹×
ÇϾǰ¢ µ¿¹Ý°ñÀýÀÌ °¢°¢ 1¸í(4%) ¼øÀ¸·Î °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.
5. ÇϾǰúµÎ °ñÀýÆíÀÇ À̵¿¾ç»ó¿¡¼­´Â ÀüÀ§ÀÇ °æ¿ì°¡ 17·Ê(66%)·Î °¡Àå ¸¹ÀÌ °üÂûµÇ¾ú°í,
Å»±¸ 5·Ê(19%), º¯À§ 4·Ê(15%) ¼øÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
6. °æ°ú°üÂû ±â°£µ¿¾È °ñÀý ºÎÀ§ÀÇ °ñ°³Á¶ ÇüÅ°¡ ÇÏ¾Ç¿Í¿Í ¿¬°üµÇ¾î Åë»óÀûÀÎ °úµÎÀÇ ¸ð
¾çÀ» º¸ÀÌ´Â °æ¿ì°¡ 23·Ê, ÇöÀúÈ÷ »óÀÌÇÑ °æ¿ì°¡ 3·Ê·Î °¢°¢ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
Bony remodeling pattern of condyle fractures in children are different from in adult
for glowing of condyle, also might affect treatment and prognosis of the condyle
fracture. Subjects of this clinical and radiologic study were 26 temporomandibular joints
diagnosed as condyle fracture in 23 patients under 15 years old age. They were treated
with conservative method at Dental Hospital of Yonsei University from Jan., 1986 to
Oct., 1994. Bony remodeling related with fracture patters was evaluated.
The results obtained are as follows :
1. The ratio of male to female in patients with condyle fracture was 1 0.9 and the
difference of sex ratio was not noted. Comparing with preschool-age group and
school-age group, age frequency was higher in preschool-age group(83%).
2. Fallen down(54%) was the most frequent cause of condyle fractures. Traffic
accident and strip down were followed.
3. The most common clinical sign of condyle fractures was tenderness to palpation(19
cases). Mouth opening limitation(17 cases), swelling(7 cases), malocclusion(3 cases) were
next in order.
4. According to sites of condyle fractures, unilateral fractures were in 20 patients and
bilateral fractures in 3 patients, therefore total 23 patients-26 cases of condyle fracture
were observed. According to fracture distribution, condyle fractures were in 10
patients(44%). Condyle fractures with symphysis fracture(9 patients, 39%), condyle
fractures with ascending ramus fracture(2 patients, 9%), condyle fracture with
mandibular body fracture(1 patient, 4%), and condyle fractures with mandibular angle
fracture(1 patient, 4%) were followed.
5. In displacement pattern of fractured fragment of mandibular condyle,
displacement(17 cases, 66%) was most common. Dislocation(5 cases, 19%) and deviation
(4 cases, 15%) were next in order.
6. During the observation period of fractured condyles, remodeling patterns of fracture
sites related with articular fossa were observed with usual condylar shape in 23 cases
and with prominently different shape in 3 cases.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸