scholarly journals Conservative Treatment Modalities in The Management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders

Author(s):  
M P Santhosh Kumar ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (21) ◽  
pp. 10239
Author(s):  
Carmen Gabriela Stelea ◽  
Doriana Agop-Forna ◽  
Raluca Dragomir ◽  
Codrina Ancuţa ◽  
Roland Törok ◽  
...  

Considered as one of the most common traumatic injuries of the maxillofacial region, mandibular fractures remain among the complex causes of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs). Due to the complexity of the temporomandibular joint, the management of TMDs represents a challenge in real-life practice; although many treatment modalities have already been proposed, ranging from conservative options to open surgical procedures, a consensus is still lacking in many aspects. Furthermore, despite continuous improvement of the management of mandible fractures, the duration of immobilization and temporary disability is not reduced, and the incidence of complications remains high. The aim of the present study is to (i) review anatomophysiological components of temporomandibular joint; (ii) review concepts of temporomandibular joint fractures; and (iii) describe methods of the recovery of the temporomandibular joint after mandibular fracture immobilization.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-164
Author(s):  
Syed Ansar Ahmad ◽  
◽  
Shamimul Hasan ◽  
Shazina Saeed ◽  
Ateeba Khan ◽  
...  

Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) encompass a wide array of ailments affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), muscles of mastication, and the allied structural framework. Myofascial pain, internal derangement of the joint, and degenerative joint diseases constitute the majority of TMDs. TMDs usually have a multifactorial etiology, and treatment modalities range from conservative therapies to surgical interventions. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has evolved as an efficient non-invasive therapeutic modality in TMDs. Previously conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown variable results regarding the efficiency of LLLT in TMJ disorder patients. Hence, this systematic review was carried out as an attempt to evaluate the efficacy of LLLT in the treatment of temporomandibular joint disorder patients.


Medicina ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
Bruno Macedo De Sousa ◽  
Nansi López-Valverde ◽  
Antonio López-Valverde ◽  
Francisco Caramelo ◽  
Javier Flores Fraile ◽  
...  

Background and Objectives: Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJDs) are associated with pain and reduced jaw mobility. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with TMJ arthralgia when submitted to four different treatment modalities, in some cases using intra-articular injections of substances with anti-inflammatory properties and in others, a more conservative approach consisting only of a bite splint. Materials and Methods: The sample was made up of 80 patients, randomly distributed into 4 groups of 20 patients each. Each patient was given a nocturnal bite splint. One of the groups was treated with the bite splint only, while each patient in the other 3 was injected with betamethasone, sodium hyaluronate, or platelet-rich plasma in addition to using the bite splint. Two variables were assessed, namely pain intensity between 0 to 10 according to the visual analogue scale and maximum pain-free mouth opening in mm. The patients were evaluated at four different points: at the beginning of the treatment, as well as one week, one month and six months after initiation. Results: The results showed that maximum pain-free mouth opening improved in all the groups that made up the sample, with either a reduction in pain severity or with no pain. However, the group injected with platelet-rich plasma yielded the best results after six months, while patients treated with sodium hyaluronate or betamethasone obtained the best results at the end of the first week. Conclusions: We concluded that all the treatments used caused a reduction in pain and increased pain-free mouth opening. The splint combined with the platelet-rich plasma injection achieved long-term success.


1995 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. P94-P94
Author(s):  
Lou Gallia

Educational objectives: To understand the natural history of temporomandibular joint disorders, to be able to diagnose these disorders, and to provide initial diagnostic and treatment modalities.


Author(s):  
Chang-Woo Kim ◽  
Sung-Jae Lee ◽  
Euy-Hyun Kim ◽  
Dong-Keon Lee ◽  
Mong-Hun Kang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background We evaluated the improvement of pain and the increase in mouth opening after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis and the possible association with various factors such as previous splint treatment, medication, and diagnosis. Results We studied 57 temporomandibular joint disorder patients who underwent arthrocentesis at Korea University Anam Hospital. These patients (24 males and 33 females, aged between 15 and 76 years) underwent arthrocentesis that was performed by one surgeon. The degree of mouth opening (assessed using the maximum mouth opening: MMO) and pain (assessed using the visual analog scale: VAS) were assessed pre- and post-arthrocentesis. The study also investigated whether treatment modalities other than arthrocentesis (medication and appliance therapy) were performed. Statistical analysis revealed that there was a significant difference in mouth opening and pain after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis. Preoperative appliance therapy affected the results of arthrocentesis, but it was not statistically significant. With regard to pain relief, preoperative diagnosis did not show a significant difference. However, with regard to maximum mouth opening, patients with disc displacement without reduction with limited mouth opening (closed lock) showed the highest recovery (11.13 mm). Conclusion The average of MMO increase after arthrocentesis was 9.10 mm, and patients with disc displacement without reduction with locking (closed lock) showed most recovery in maximum mouth opening and it was statistically significant. The average pain relief of patients after arthrocentesis was 3.03 in the VAS scale, and patients using anterior repositioning splint (ARS) preoperatively showed the most pain relief.


2012 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. 89-96
Author(s):  
P. Hliňáková ◽  
T. Dostálová ◽  
L. Navrátil ◽  
V. Kroulíková ◽  
M. Bučková

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Marina A. Gavin Clavero ◽  
M. Victoria Simón Sanz ◽  
Eduard Mirada Donisa ◽  
Rocio Gallego Sobrino ◽  
Leire Esparza Lasaga

Aims: Temporomandibular dysfunction is a generic term that covers a large number of clinical problems affecting not only TMJ (Temporomandibular Joint), but also the masticatory musculature and related structures. Arthrocentesis is the most commonly used technique in patients with pain or limitation of the oral opening due to joint causes in which conservative treatment has failed. It is generally performed under local anesthesia and sedation, although depending on the type of patient and the preferences of the surgeon it can also be performed under general anesthesia. Material and method: A prospective, observational, analytical cohort study has been carried out to evaluate if the type of anesthesia, the drugs used for sedation and whether or not anesthetic induction is performed during arthrocentesis influence the results of 111 arthrocentesis performed in patients with TMJ pathology. Results: In patients who arthrocentesis was performed with propofol without midazolam the improvement in pain at one week and one month postarthrocentesis was greater than propofol with midazolam was used. Conclusion: The type of anesthesia could influence the results of arthrocentesis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document