2010
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-141
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trigeminal Electrophysiology: a 2 × 2 matrix model for differential diagnosis between temporomandibular disorders and orofacial pain

Abstract: BackgroundPain due to temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) often has the same clinical symptoms and signs as other types of orofacial pain (OP). The possible presence of serious neurological and/or systemic organic pathologies makes differential diagnosis difficult, especially in early disease stages. In the present study, we performed a qualitative and quantitative electrophysiological evaluation of the neuromuscular responses of the trigeminal nervous system. Using the jaw jerk reflex (JJ) and the motor evoked… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The RDC should consider the patient as affected by a painful syndrome, and should tend towards the definition of a differential diagnosis between organic and/or functional pathologies [36]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The RDC should consider the patient as affected by a painful syndrome, and should tend towards the definition of a differential diagnosis between organic and/or functional pathologies [36]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Borgsteede et al [30] supported this by showing that musculoskeletal symptoms were prevalent in at least 20% of patient-GP encounters during the last three months of life. This is higher than the 14% annual prevalence of GP consultations for musculoskeletal disease in the general population reported by Jordan et al [33]. However, the studies were undertaken in different countries and used different systems for classifying consultation data making direct comparison difficult.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…These differences in latency up to the maximal current density depend on the capacitive components of the tissues encountered by the intracranial current flow [25][26][27]. The signal saturation of the root is the first step to be performed, even before clinically interpreting a delay in latency [44][45][46][47].…”
Section: Absolute Neural Evoked Energy ( M Anee)mentioning
confidence: 99%