Oral radiology · 2026
Comparison of dynamic high-frequency ultrasound-guided versus conventional manual determination of mandibular protrusion in the treatment of disc displacement with reduction: a prospective, stratified randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huang Xinqi, Li Chenyang, Liao Juntong, Cen Zinan, Zhou Jinbo, Ren Jiayin, Cen Xiao
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of dynamic high-frequency ultrasound guidance versus conventional manual techniques for determining the mandibular protrusive position of anterior repositioning splints (ARS) in the treatment of disc displacement with reduction (DDwR).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized controlled trial included 40 patients with DDwR, who were randomly and equally divided into an ultrasound-guided group (US-ARS) and a conventional manual group (M-ARS). Both groups received customized ARS therapy. At baseline and 3 months post-treatment, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate joint spaces and condylar bone characteristics, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to measure the disc-condyle angle and disc morphology.
RESULTS: After 3 months of treatment, there were no significant inter-group differences regarding the increase in CBCT joint spaces and the improvement in condylar bone scores (P > 0.05). However, in the MRI soft-tissue evaluation, the US-ARS group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in the disc-condyle angle (-20.50° ± 7.50° vs. -12.00° ± 8.50°, P = 0.002) and a superior improvement in the disc morphology score (P = 0.001) compared to the M-ARS group.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional empirical manual techniques, ultrasound guidance provides a more precise determination of the magnitude of mandibular protrusion. This achieves superior three-dimensional articular disc reduction and morphological remodeling at the soft-tissue level while maintaining equivalent hard-tissue decompression efficacy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: MR5124001996.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized controlled trial included 40 patients with DDwR, who were randomly and equally divided into an ultrasound-guided group (US-ARS) and a conventional manual group (M-ARS). Both groups received customized ARS therapy. At baseline and 3 months post-treatment, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate joint spaces and condylar bone characteristics, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to measure the disc-condyle angle and disc morphology.
RESULTS: After 3 months of treatment, there were no significant inter-group differences regarding the increase in CBCT joint spaces and the improvement in condylar bone scores (P > 0.05). However, in the MRI soft-tissue evaluation, the US-ARS group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in the disc-condyle angle (-20.50° ± 7.50° vs. -12.00° ± 8.50°, P = 0.002) and a superior improvement in the disc morphology score (P = 0.001) compared to the M-ARS group.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional empirical manual techniques, ultrasound guidance provides a more precise determination of the magnitude of mandibular protrusion. This achieves superior three-dimensional articular disc reduction and morphological remodeling at the soft-tissue level while maintaining equivalent hard-tissue decompression efficacy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: MR5124001996.