D. Manfredini

University of Padova, School of Dentistry, Faculty Member

Followers

Following

Co-authors

Public Views

Daniele Manfredini received his DDS from the University of Pisa, Italy in 1999, a MSc in Occlusion and Craniomandibular Disorders in 2001 from the same University, and a PhD in Dentistry from the ACTA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in 2011. He was a clinical fellow at the Section of Prosthetic Dentistry, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pisa, Italy until 2005. Since 2006, Daniele Manfredini has been Assistant Professor and coordinator of the research projects at the TMD Clinic, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Padova, Italy.
Currently, he holds teaching in Prosthodontics and TMJ Physiopathology, and in Bruxism and Parafunctions at the School of Dentistry, University of Padova.
On January 2014, the Italian Ministry of University and Research (MIUR) appointed him as an Associate Professor by scientific merit at the age of 38.
Daniele Manfredini authored more than 140 papers in the field of bruxism and temporomandibular disorders in journals indexed in the Medline database. He also edited, among the others, the book “Current concepts on temporomandibular disorders” (Quintessence Publishing, 2010), including contributions from 45 world-renowned experts, and co-authored several textbooks on the same topics.
Based on publication ratings, since November 2013, the US agency Expertscape has been ranking Daniele Manfredini as world #1 expert in the field of temporomandibular joint disorders, and #3 in the field of bruxism.

less

Interests

Uploads

Papers by D. Manfredini

Bruxism defined and graded: an international consensus

by Takafumi Kato and D. Manfredini

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2013

To date, there is no consensus about the definition and diagnostic grading of bruxism. A written ... more To date, there is no consensus about the definition and diagnostic grading of bruxism. A written consensus discussion was held among an international group of bruxism experts as to formulate a definition of bruxism and to suggest a grading system for its operationalisation. The expert group defined bruxism as a repetitive jaw-muscle activity characterised by clenching or grinding of the teeth and/or by bracing or thrusting of the mandible. Bruxism has two distinct circadian manifestations: it can occur during sleep (indicated as sleep bruxism) or during wakefulness (indicated as awake bruxism). For the operationalisation of this definition, the expert group proposes a diagnostic grading system of &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;possible&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;, &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;probable&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39; and &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;definite&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39; sleep or awake bruxism. The proposed definition and grading system are suggested for clinical and research purposes in all relevant dental and medical domains.

Comparison of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of temporomandibular joint disc displacement

by Mario Bosco and D. Manfredini

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2005

The aim of this work was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of ultrasonography in the diagn... more The aim of this work was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc position abnormalities compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants in this study were 41 consecutive patients with signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders. All 82 TMJs were evaluated to detect disc position abnormalities by means of ultrasonography and MRI, performed by blinded operators. The accuracy of ultrasonography was evaluated with respect to MRI. Ultrasonography demonstrated good accuracy in the evaluation of disc position, showing a sensitivity of 65AE8% and a specificity of 80AE4%, resulting in a positive likelihood ratio of 3AE35, a negative likelihood ratio of 0AE42, and a diagnostic odds ratio of 7AE97. The predictive positive and negatives values were respectively 77AE1% and 70AE2% and the overall agreement between the two radiological techniques was 73AE1%. Ultrasonography proved to be accurate in detecting normal disc position and the presence of abnormalities in disc-condyle relationship but not so useful for the distinction between disc displacement with and without reduction.

D. Manfredini

Uploads

Papers by D. Manfredini

Log In