Single-Needle Arthrocentesis with Upper Compartment Distension versus Conventional Two-Needle Arthrocentesis: Randomized Clinical Trial

The objective of this study was to compare single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) with the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis. Twenty-six patients with articular disc displacement without reduction (DDWOR) were included in the s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPain research & management Vol. 2017; no. 2017; pp. 1 - 5
Main Authors Iwaki Filho, Liogi, Iwaki, Lilian Cristina Vessoni, Poluha, Rodrigo Lorenzi, Guilherme Vargas Pasqual, Primo, Grossmann, Eduardo, Setogutti, Ênio Tadashi
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Cairo, Egypt Hindawi Publishing Corporation 01.01.2017
Hindawi
Hindawi Limited
Wiley
Subjects
Care and treatment
Clinical trials
Comparative analysis
Dentistry
Evidence-based medicine
Hydraulics
Maxillofacial surgery
Medical imaging
Medicine
Methods
Pain
Pain management
Pathology
Patients
Rheumatoid arthritis
Statistical analysis
Surgery
Synovial fluid analysis
Temporomandibular joint disorders
Brazil
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The objective of this study was to compare single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) with the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis. Twenty-six patients with articular disc displacement without reduction (DDWOR) were included in the study and assigned to two groups (n=13): single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the TMJ (1N) and conventional two-needle arthrocentesis (2N). The maximum interincisal distance (MID) and TMJ pain as measured by the visual analog scale (VAS) were compared. MID and VAS data were obtained: before (T1), seven days after (T2), fifteen days after (T3), one month after (T4), three months after (T5), six months after (T6), nine months after (T7), and one year after the arthrocentesis procedures (T8). Considering each group individually, results of the VAS scores and MID measurements showed a significant difference between T1 and T2–T8 (p<0.001) in both groups. Between two groups, results show no significant differences (p>0.05). Both techniques tested were effective in reducing pain and increasing MID. Due to the advantages over the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis, single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment should be considered as the first treatment option for patients with painful hypomobilized TMJ of DDWOR.
Bibliography:Academic Editor: Filippo Brighina
ISSN:1203-6765
1918-1523
DOI:10.1155/2017/2435263