The coronoid process is a beaklike process in the ramus of the mandible. Coronoid process hyperplasia (CPH) is a rare possible cause of reduced mouth opening. An overgrown process interferes with mandibular rotation and lateral excursion and hence leads to restricted mouth opening (RMO). Although some factors are suggested, etiology of CPH is not completely known. Prescription of suitable radiography is necessary for an accurate diagnosis. This article reports a 30-year-old man with bilateral CPH and progressive RMO since childhood. This disorder affected his oral hygiene and quality of life. With the help of different types of radiography, CPH was diagnosed and coronoidectomy was the only treatment option. The patient showed normal jaw movements after the surgery and postoperative physiotherapy. General dentists have an important role in noticing RMO and referring the patients to maxillofacial radiologists. Although it is a rare phenomenon, general dentists need to keep CPH in mind as a possible cause. Panoramic imaging accompanied by computed tomography or cone beam computed tomography is the best imaging option in such cases.

This study evaluated the potential of two goat types (hairy and cashmere) for quality and quantity of skin and leather production. Goat skins (200: males n = 80, and females n = 120) of two age groups (<1 year, n = 80; and 1–5 years, n = 120) representing two genotypes (hairy and cashmere) were used. There were significant differences between hairy and cashmere goats for skin area (43.7 ± 0.9 and 41.8 ± 0.9 dm2; P = 0.04). Cashmere goat leather had significantly higher values for thickness (1.01 ± 0.01 vs 0.96 ± 0.01 mm; P = 0.05) and percentage extension (66.4 ± 0.9 vs 63.1 ± 0.9%; P = 0.04) than hairy goat leather. There were no type effects on leather weight (P = 0.3), area or dimension (P = 0.6–0.1), breaking force (P = 0.8), or tensile strength (P = 0.06). Male goats had significantly (P < 0.0001) heavier skins (1288 ± 26.4 vs 804 ± 23.3 g) with greater area (49.2 ± 0.9 vs 35.3 ± 0.9 dm2) and greater thickness at all sites measured than females. In addition, male goats had significantly (P < 0.0001) heavier leather (568.1 ± 13.5 vs 321.2 ± 11.6 g) with greater area (71.4 ± 0.9 vs 53.8 ± 0.9 dm2), length (96.3 ± 1.1 vs 83.1 ± 0.9 cm), and width (65.4 ± 0.7 vs 60.8 ± 0.6 cm). Leather from male goats had significantly (P < 0.0001) higher breaking force (32.9 ± 0.8 vs 23.2 ± 0.7 kg), tensile strength (296.5 ± 5.6 vs 264.2 ± 4.9 kg force/cm2), and percentage extension (68.5 ± 1.0 vs 61.0 ± 0.9%) than females. Adult goats had significantly heavier (P < 0.0001) skins and leather with greater (P < 0.0001) area and greater (P = 0.0006–< 0.0001) leather thickness at all sites measured than kids. Leather from adult goats had significantly higher values for breaking force (29.6 ± 0.7 vs 26.5 ± 0.8 kg; P = 0.001) and percentage extension (66.6 ± 0.9 vs 62.9 ± 1.0%; P = 0.006), but tensile strength was not significantly different (283.6 ± 5.1 vs 276.4 ± 5.1 kg force/cm2; P = 0.3). The region of sampling had significant (P < 0.0001) effects on physical properties of goat leather. The skin form hip, top shoulder, and back regions had highest thickness, followed by the rib and belt. Leather samples from shoulder showed significantly greater (P < 0.0001) breaking force and tensile strength (31.7 ± 0.7 kg, 313.4 ± 4.6 kg force/cm2) than hip (24.7 ± 0.7 kg, 226.6 ± 4.6 kg force/cm2) and rib (25.4 ± 0.7 kg, 294.4 ± 4.6 kg force/cm2), but had less extension (59.0 ± 0.9 vs 68.0 ± 0.9 and 65.4 ± 0.9%; P < 0.0001). Samples taken parallel to the backbone had significantly (P < 0.0001) higher force and strength (31.2 ± 0.7 kg, 314.3 ± 4.3 kg force/cm2) than perpendicular samples (23.4 ± 0.7 kg, 241.9 ± 4.3 kg force/cm2), although they showed smaller (P < 0.0001) percentage extension (59.9 ± 0.9, 68.4 ± 0.9%). Phenotypic correlation estimates among studied traits ranged from +0.4 for physical characteristics of leather with weight and area to +0.9 among weight, area, and thickness of skin and leather. This study showed that skin and leather differences were greater between males and females, and between kids and adults, than between hairy and cashmere goats.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract