Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics · 2009
Arthrocentesis versus nonsurgical methods in the treatment of temporomandibular disc displacement without reduction.
Сравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Diraçoğlu Demirhan, Saral Ilknur Bayraktar, Keklik Bariş, Kurt Hanefi, Emekli Ufuk, Ozçakar Levent, Karan Ayşe, Aksoy Cihan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the short- and medium-term results of arthrocentesis and conventional treatment (splint, heat, and exercise) in patients with early temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc displacement without reduction (DDw/oR).
STUDY DESIGN: One hundred twenty consecutive patients (104 female, 16 male), who had been followed by a multidisciplinary TMJ unit with the diagnosis of DDw/oR were enrolled in this single-blind prospective study. Patients either underwent arthrocentesis or they were given a combination of splint, hot pack, and home exercise program. Visual analog scale (VAS) was used for pain assessment. Maximal mouth opening (MMO), lateral movement, and protrusion were measured. Repeat measurements were performed on the first, third, and sixth months following treatments.
RESULTS: Arthrocentesis group consisted of 54 individuals (51 female, 3 male), and the conventional treatment group consisted of 56 individuals (49 female, 7 male). The mean age values of the groups were 33.4 years (range 15-63 years) and 34.8 years (range 17-61 years), respectively. Baseline VAS and MMO values of the arthrocentesis and conventional treatment groups were similar (P > .05). Regarding VAS and MMO, lateral movement, and protrusion, the intragroup analyses showed a statistically significant reduction in both groups compared with baseline values (all P < .01). Regarding VAS values, the difference values between each evaluation and the baseline measurement were significantly higher in the arthrocentesis group, except for the first-month difference. Regarding MMO, lateral movements, and protrusion, the differences between the baseline values and each evaluation thereafter were statistically similar between the 2 groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: We conclude that early treatment either with conservative methods or with arthrocentesis is beneficial in DDw/oR. However, arthrocentesis seems to be superior regarding pain management. Therefore, arthrocentesis may be indicated in patients where painful complaints overwhelm despite other conservative treatments.
STUDY DESIGN: One hundred twenty consecutive patients (104 female, 16 male), who had been followed by a multidisciplinary TMJ unit with the diagnosis of DDw/oR were enrolled in this single-blind prospective study. Patients either underwent arthrocentesis or they were given a combination of splint, hot pack, and home exercise program. Visual analog scale (VAS) was used for pain assessment. Maximal mouth opening (MMO), lateral movement, and protrusion were measured. Repeat measurements were performed on the first, third, and sixth months following treatments.
RESULTS: Arthrocentesis group consisted of 54 individuals (51 female, 3 male), and the conventional treatment group consisted of 56 individuals (49 female, 7 male). The mean age values of the groups were 33.4 years (range 15-63 years) and 34.8 years (range 17-61 years), respectively. Baseline VAS and MMO values of the arthrocentesis and conventional treatment groups were similar (P > .05). Regarding VAS and MMO, lateral movement, and protrusion, the intragroup analyses showed a statistically significant reduction in both groups compared with baseline values (all P < .01). Regarding VAS values, the difference values between each evaluation and the baseline measurement were significantly higher in the arthrocentesis group, except for the first-month difference. Regarding MMO, lateral movements, and protrusion, the differences between the baseline values and each evaluation thereafter were statistically similar between the 2 groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: We conclude that early treatment either with conservative methods or with arthrocentesis is beneficial in DDw/oR. However, arthrocentesis seems to be superior regarding pain management. Therefore, arthrocentesis may be indicated in patients where painful complaints overwhelm despite other conservative treatments.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultExercise TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHyperthermia, InducedIsotonic SolutionsJoint DislocationsMaleMiddle AgedOcclusal SplintsPain MeasurementParacentesisProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularRinger's LactateSingle-Blind MethodTemporomandibular Joint DiscTemporomandibular Joint DisordersTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult