Evaluation of the effectiveness of different puncture points for second cannula in double puncture arthrocentesis of temporomandibular joint |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara Y?ld?r?m Beyaz?t University, Ankara, Turkey;2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey;1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Asahi General Hospital, Chiba, Japan;2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan;3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Dokkyo Medical University Saitama Medical Center, Saitama, Japan;1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dental Medicine, Bahçe?ehir University, Istanbul, Turkey;2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz May?s University, Samsun, Turkey;3. Department of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz May?s University, Samsun, Turkey;4. Department of Pathology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ondokuz May?s University, Samsun, Turkey;1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, SRM Dental College and Hospital, Ramapuram Campus, Ramapuram, Chennai, India;2. Indian Council of Medical Research — National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India;1. Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Lazio, Italy;2. Department of Neurosurgery, Meyer Children’s Hospital, Florence, Toscana, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | The study at checking if treatment outcomes in double puncture temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis (DPTMJA) changed when the puncture points of the second cannula punctate were changed.Using a retrospective cohort study design, the investigators enrolled a sample of temporomandibular joint disorder (TMD, internal derangement) patients receiving DPTMJA. The decision of whether to perform a modified or traditional arthrocentesis was made by the patients: Patients who accepted the close cannula relationship were evaluated as group 1 (modification group), and those who did not agree as group 2 (traditional group). The predictor variable was puncture points of the second cannula (close to vs. far from the first cannula; group 1 and 2, respectively). The main outcome variables included maximum mouth opening (MMO), and pain assessed using a Likert-type (0–10) visual analogue scale (VAS) before treatment and at 1st day and 3rd months intervals. Appropriate statistics were computed using P < .05 was considered significant.The study sample comprised 32 patients (93.8% females; 50% in each study arm) with an average age of 36.9 ± 15.3 years (range, 18–78). Although, patient age and gender, and baseline VAS in both groups were not significant different (P > .05), the baseline MMO in group 2 was significant higher than that in group 1 (P = .03). The within-group analyses demonstrated the significant improvement of both MMO and VAS at postoperative month 3 (P < .05). However, the between-group analyses rejected the significant differences between the 2 groups at day 1 and month 3 (P > .05).Within the limitations of the study the choice of one or the other technique should be left to the discretion of the surgeon. |
| |
| Keywords: | Temporomandibular disorder Arthrocentesis Cohort study Cannula puncture Outcome research |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
