双刺 versus 单刺关节穿刺术治疗单侧不可复性颞下颌关节盘移位：一项随机对照试验。
Double puncture versus single puncture arthrocentesis for the management of unilateral temporomandibular joint disc displacement without reduction: A randomized controlled trial.
机构信息
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2492, 90035-004, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Mandacaru Avenue, 1550 - 87080-000, Maringá, Brazil.
出版信息
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018 Dec;46(12):2003-2007. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.10.015. Epub 2018 Oct 26.
PURPOSE
To compare the clinical efficacy of the conventional double puncture versus single puncture type 2 arthrocentesis for management of temporomandibular joint disc displacement without reduction (DDWOR).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Twenty-six patients with DDWOR were randomly and blindly allocated into two treatment groups (N = 13): Group 1, conventional double puncture arthrocentesis; Group 2, single puncture type 2 arthrocentesis. Data on gender, side of painful joint complaint, age (years), duration of joint pain (months), maximum interincisal distance (MID - mm), and pain intensity self-reported with a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-10) were collected. VAS scores and MID were measured before (baseline) and 6 months after arthrocentesis (final).
RESULTS
Both techniques resulted in significantly reduced VAS scores and increased MID (p = 0.001) after 180 days. However, there were no statistically significant differences between techniques (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
The two arthrocentesis methods tested were effective in reducing VAS scores and increasing MID in patients with DDWOR.
目的
比较常规双穿刺与单穿刺 2 型关节腔穿刺术治疗不可复性关节盘前移位（DDWOR）的临床疗效。
材料和方法
26 例 DDWOR 患者随机、盲法分为两组（N=13）：组 1，常规双穿刺关节腔穿刺术；组 2，单穿刺 2 型关节腔穿刺术。记录患者性别、疼痛关节侧别、年龄（岁）、关节疼痛持续时间（月）、最大开口度（MID-mm）和视觉模拟评分（VAS；0-10）。分别于关节腔穿刺术前（基线）和术后 6 个月（末次）测量 VAS 评分和 MID。
结果
两种技术在 180 天后均显著降低了 VAS 评分并增加了 MID（p=0.001）。然而，两种技术之间没有统计学上的显著差异（p>0.05）。
结论
两种关节腔穿刺术均能有效降低 DDWOR 患者的 VAS 评分和增加 MID。
Zotero 插件