Masseter Muscle Model
Masseter Muscle Model - Related Videos
06:33
Freezing Injury in Mouse Masseter Muscle to Establish an Orofacial Muscle Fibrosis Model
0 Views •
Cited by 2 •
2023
The goal of this protocol is to establish an orofacial muscle fibrosis model. Comparison of the histology between mice masseter and tibialis anterior muscle after freezing injury confirmed masseter muscle fibrosis. This model will facilitate further investigation into the mechanism underlying orofacial muscle fibrosis.
03:46
Rodent Model of Masseter Volumetric Muscle Loss for Studying Bioengineering Materials
0 Views •
Cited by 3 •
2024
Here, we describe a protocol for the surgical creation of a volumetric muscle loss (VML) injury in the rat masseter, providing a reproducible and accessible model for the study of craniofacial muscle injuries and their treatment using biomaterials such as the novel hydrogel.
06:46
In Vivo Functional Assessment of Rat Masseter Muscle Following Surgical Creation of a Volumetric Muscle Loss (VML) Injury
0 Views •
Cited by 1 •
2024
Volumetric muscle loss (VML) injuries exceed endogenous regenerative ability, resulting in permanent functional deficits. Current VML research primarily focuses on limb and trunk muscles. To extend mechanistic studies of VML to craniofacial muscles, this article describes an in vivo method for longitudinal assessment of masseter muscle function pre- and post-VML injury.
11:35
Isolation of Quiescent Stem Cell Populations from Individual Skeletal Muscles
0 Views •
Cited by 4 •
2022
This protocol describes the isolation of muscle stem cells and fibro-adipogenic progenitors from individual skeletal muscles in mice. The protocol involves single muscle dissection, stem cell isolation by fluorescence activated cell sorting, purity assessment by immunofluorescence staining, and quantitative measurement of S-phase entry by 5-ethynyl-2´-deoxyuridine incorporation assay.
08:24
A Murine Model of Muscle Training by Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation
0 Views •
Cited by 16 •
2012
A murine model of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES), a safe and inexpensive clinical modality, to the anterior compartment muscles is described. This model has the advantage of modifying a readily available clinical device for the purpose of eliciting targeted and specific muscle contractions in mice.
FAQs
The model links an assigned level of muscle activation with the masseter’s geometry, attachment sites, and force generation. These relationships allow the resulting muscular force to be evaluated in relation to mandibular mechanics under defined conditions. The outcome is an estimate of how changes in muscle behavior may affect jaw movement and mechanical loading during activities such as chewing.
Geometry and attachment sites determine how generated muscle force is transferred to the mandible. Changing either feature can alter the modeled mechanical relationship between the muscle and jaw, influencing estimated movement, bite-force distribution, and loading. Representing these structural characteristics is therefore important when analyzing normal function or examining altered anatomy after injury or surgery.
A computational representation describes masseter structure and force behavior through a biomechanical model, whereas an experimental representation examines the muscle or its function through a physical or measured setup. Both approaches can represent relationships between muscle force and mandibular mechanics. Their shared value lies in studying jaw function under defined conditions and supporting bioengineering analysis of head and neck mechanics.
Altered anatomy can change the muscle geometry or attachment relationships used to calculate force transfer to the mandible. Injury, surgery, or other anatomical changes may therefore modify predicted jaw movement, bite-force distribution, or temporomandibular joint loading. Modeling these changes helps investigators examine their mechanical consequences and compare possible interventions or reconstructed anatomical arrangements.
A setup requires a representation of the masseter’s geometry, its attachment sites, muscle activation, and force generation. These inputs are connected to mandibular mechanics under specified conditions, producing estimates of jaw movement and loading. The resulting framework can then be used to examine chewing, bite-force distribution, or the mechanical effects of changed anatomy.
The model can provide estimates related to chewing, bite-force distribution, mandibular movement, and temporomandibular joint loading. These outcomes describe how muscle structure and force contribute to jaw mechanics rather than treating the muscle in isolation. Such information supports evaluation of mechanical changes associated with injury, surgery, altered anatomy, or proposed therapeutic interventions.
It is useful when a bioengineering study needs to assess how an implant, intervention, or anatomical change may affect jaw mechanics. By relating masseter structure and force to mandibular function, the model provides a framework for examining loading and movement consequences. It can also support improved biomechanical simulations of the head and neck and inform comparisons among design or treatment options.