Tepecik Tahsin, Baş Mehmet Zahit
Assistant Professor, Hamidiye Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Health Sciences, İstanbul, Turkey.
Assistant Professor, Hamidiye Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Health Sciences, İstanbul, Turkey.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024 Dec;82(12):1519-1527. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2024.09.002. Epub 2024 Sep 18.
The role of adjunctive injection agents at the end of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis remains controversial.
This study aims to compare pain reduction in patients with disc displacement without reduction treated with arthrocentesis alone (AO), arthrocentesis with injectable platelet-rich fibrin (iPRF), and arthrocentesis with hyaluronic acid (HA).
STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND SAMPLE: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the affiliated hospital of Health Sciences University, Hamidiye Faculty of Dentistry. Inclusion criteria were female subjects aged 18-65, who underwent TMJ unilateral arthrocentesis, and diagnosed with disc displacement without reduction. Exclusion criteria were prior use of occlusal splints, accompanying diagnosis of myalgia and bilateral arthralgia which both of the joints exceeds or equal to 50 mm visual analogue scale for pain (pVAS) value.
The primary predictor variable was the adjunctive injection agent: iPRF, HA, or no injection (AO as control).
Primary and secondary outcomes were measured preoperatively (T0), and at 1 month (T1) and 6 months (T2) postoperatively. The primary outcome was pain (pVAS) at T2. Secondary outcomes were pVAS at T1 and maximum interincisal opening at T1 and T2.
Demographics, preoperative and perioperative data were collected.
Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted. The P value was set at ≤.05.
A total of 88 subjects completed the study. The mean age of the subjects in the AO (n = 30), HA (n = 29) and iPRF (n = 29) groups was 36.8 (±10.2), 34.8 (±8.9) and 37.6 (±11.6) respectively (P > .05). The mean pVAS scores at T0 for the AO, HA and iPRF groups were 63.2 (±8.7), 66.7 (±9.6) and 66.2 (±9.6) respectively (P > .05). The mean pVAS scores at T1 were 36.5 (±10.8), 29.0(±11.5) and 35.9 (±9.8) respectively (P < .05). The mean pVAS scores at T2 were 34.8 (±16.3), 24.7 (±12.7) and 25.3 (±13.4) respectively (P < .05). There were no differences in maximum interincisal opening between the groups at any timepoint (P > .05).
iPRF and HA injections are associated with greater pain relief compared to AO. No significant difference was observed between iPRF and HA, suggesting that the choice between them can be based on cost-effectiveness.
颞下颌关节(TMJ)关节穿刺术结束时辅助注射剂的作用仍存在争议。
本研究旨在比较单纯关节穿刺术(AO)、注射富血小板纤维蛋白(iPRF)的关节穿刺术和注射透明质酸(HA)的关节穿刺术治疗不可复性盘移位患者的疼痛减轻情况。
研究设计、地点和样本:在哈米迪耶牙科学院健康科学大学附属医院进行了一项单中心回顾性队列研究。纳入标准为年龄在18 - 65岁的女性受试者,她们接受了TMJ单侧关节穿刺术,并被诊断为不可复性盘移位。排除标准为既往使用过咬合板、伴有肌痛诊断以及双侧关节痛且两个关节疼痛的视觉模拟量表(pVAS)值均超过或等于50mm。
主要预测变量为辅助注射剂:iPRF、HA或不注射(AO作为对照)。
在术前(T0)、术后1个月(T1)和6个月(T2)测量主要和次要结局。主要结局是T2时的疼痛(pVAS)。次要结局是T1时的pVAS以及T1和T2时的最大切牙间开口度。
收集人口统计学、术前和围手术期数据。
进行描述性、双变量和多变量分析。P值设定为≤0.05。
共有88名受试者完成了研究。AO组(n = 30)、HA组(n = 29)和iPRF组(n = 29)受试者的平均年龄分别为36.8(±10.2)、34.8(±8.9)和37.6(±11.6)(P > 0.05)。AO组、HA组和iPRF组在T0时的平均pVAS评分分别为63.2(±8.7)、66.7(±9.6)和66.2(±9.6)(P > 0.05)。T1时的平均pVAS评分分别为36.5(±10.8)、29.0(±11.5)和35.9(±9.8)(P < 0.05)。T2时的平均pVAS评分分别为34.8(±16.3)、24.7(±12.7)和25.3(±13.4)(P < 0.05)。在任何时间点,各组之间的最大切牙间开口度均无差异(P > 0.05)。
与AO相比,iPRF和HA注射与更大程度的疼痛缓解相关。iPRF和HA之间未观察到显著差异,表明它们之间的选择可基于成本效益。