Article

The tori of the mouth and ear: A review.

Department of Anatomical Sciences, School of Medicine, St George's University, Grenada, West Indies; Department of Anatomy, Medical School Varmia and Masuria, Olsztyn, Poland.
Clinical Anatomy (Impact Factor: 1.16). 08/2013; DOI: 10.1002/ca.22264
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There is a great deal of literature regarding the tori of the mouth and ear. However, there is controversy regarding the etiology and prevalence of each. The torus palatinus is generally agreed to be the most common oral exostosis and is more frequently found in females. The torus mandibularis is also quite common, is more prevalent in males, and occurs bilaterally in 80% of cases. Far less data have been presented regarding the torus maxillaries primarily due to the lack of consensus regarding its nomenclature and classification. These oral tori are thought to be inherited in an autosomal dominant manner with a relatively high penetrance; however, environmental and functional factors have been postulated that may account for a more complex etiology than simply genetics. The torus auditivus is rarely acknowledged in clinical papers and most data are found in anthropological journals. Although there is an abundance of literature that addresses these traits individually, there is a lack of research that collectively acknowledges these. Therefore, the aim of this study was to present a composite review of the tori with regards to their anatomical features, prevalence, etiology and clinical relevance. Clin. Anat., 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
139 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Osseous grafting techniques represent one mode of therapy to manage combination pocket-osseous defects. They have their greatest applicability in the intrabony defect although encouraging results have been noted in furcation and suprabony sites. Like all treatment modalities, their usage is dictated by the therapeutic objectives for specific problems and whether their respective advantages and limitations outweigh other management techniques. They are neither a panacea nor an unproven experimental venture. When properly employed, they are a valuable component of currently accepted therapy. When compared with other treatment approaches, the following relative advantages and limitations have been noted with osseous grafts: Advantages 1. Reconstruct lost periodontium. 2. Idealistic therapeutic objective. 3. Reversal of disease process. 4. Increase tooth support. 5. Enhance esthetics. 6. Improve function. Limitations 1. Additional treatment time. 2. Autograft disadvantages. 3. Availability of graft material. 4. Additional postoperative care. 5. Unique postoperative problems. 6. Variations in repair. 7. Longer post-treatment evaluation interval. 8. Predictability. 9. Greater expense. 10. Multistep therapy common. 11. Vulnerability to recurrence.
    Journal of Periodontology 10/1977; 48(9):570-6. · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Six hundred and eithty-one dried human skulls of different ethnic backgrounds or localities were examined for the presence of palatal exostosis in the molar region. Of these samples, 276 (40.53%) exhibited some form of palatal exostosis. Chi-square analysis shows that the occurrence of exostosis is: (a) Dependent upon the locality in which the subject lives; (b) Influenced by age; (c) In any age group, dependent upon the locality; (d) Dependent upon the type or class of exostosis; (e) In any type, influenced by locality. The result of this investigation may become clinically important. It suggests, for the clinicians in the field of periodontics, certain diagnostic guidelines for treatment planning of periodontal surgical procedures in the palatal molar region. Thus, an awareness of the patients' ethnic background, as well as age, may be essential in order to minimize or avoid unnecessary postoperative healing complications.
    Journal of Periodontology 11/1977; 48(10):663-6. · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • The Journal of Laryngology & Otology 01/1978; 91(12):1113-6. · 0.68 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
202 Downloads
Available from
May 16, 2014