TY - JOUR
T1 - Arthrocentesis versus nonsurgical methods in the management of temporomandibular joint closed lock and pain
T2 - a double-blind randomized controlled trial
AU - Ritto, Fabio G.
AU - Cueto, Alexander Pomares
AU - dos Santos Canellas, João Vitor
AU - Zuniga, John R.
AU - Tiwana, Paul S.
AU - Pimentel, Thais
AU - Medeiros, Paulo Jose
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - Objective: The present double-blind randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy of conservative treatment and articular lavage, either alone or combined, to reduce joint pain and improve mandibular opening. Study Design: The sample consisted of patients presenting with limited mouth opening and joint pain. The diagnosis was made according to the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders guideline and confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. Sixty patients were selected and randomly allocated to 4 groups of 15 patients each with different treatments: group A (conservative), group B (conservative + medication), group C (arthrocentesis), and group D (arthrocentesis + medication). The groups were compared in terms of maximal interincisal opening and pain. Results: The average age of the patients was 34.17 ± 13.1 years, 88.1% were women, 72.9% had internal derangement, 54% had joint sounds, and 55.9% presented with locking. Clinical improvement was noted in all parameters compared with baseline in all groups (P < .005), but no significant differences were observed when the groups were compared (P > .05). Conclusions: Both arthrocentesis and conservative modalities were efficient treatments to reduce joint pain and increase mandibular opening.
AB - Objective: The present double-blind randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy of conservative treatment and articular lavage, either alone or combined, to reduce joint pain and improve mandibular opening. Study Design: The sample consisted of patients presenting with limited mouth opening and joint pain. The diagnosis was made according to the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders guideline and confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. Sixty patients were selected and randomly allocated to 4 groups of 15 patients each with different treatments: group A (conservative), group B (conservative + medication), group C (arthrocentesis), and group D (arthrocentesis + medication). The groups were compared in terms of maximal interincisal opening and pain. Results: The average age of the patients was 34.17 ± 13.1 years, 88.1% were women, 72.9% had internal derangement, 54% had joint sounds, and 55.9% presented with locking. Clinical improvement was noted in all parameters compared with baseline in all groups (P < .005), but no significant differences were observed when the groups were compared (P > .05). Conclusions: Both arthrocentesis and conservative modalities were efficient treatments to reduce joint pain and increase mandibular opening.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85112100342&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85112100342&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.oooo.2021.06.020
DO - 10.1016/j.oooo.2021.06.020
M3 - Article
C2 - 34373214
AN - SCOPUS:85112100342
SN - 2212-4403
VL - 133
SP - 369
EP - 376
JO - Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology
JF - Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology
IS - 4
ER -