Primo Guilherme Vargas Pasqual1, Rodrigo Lorenzi Poluha2, Ênio Tadashi Setogutti3, Eduardo Grossmann4. 1. Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul , Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 2. Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá , Maringá, PR, Brazil. 3. Private Clinic , Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 4. Department of Dentistry, Craniofacial Pain Applied to Dentistry, Dentistry Faculty, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul , Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate joint effusion and positioning of the articular disc through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after two different arthrocentesis techniques. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with dislocation of the articular disc without reduction (ADDwoR) were included and randomly divided into two groups: single needle arthrocentesis with distention of the upper compartment of the TMJ (A1) and conventional arthrocentesis with 2 needles (A2). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed between the different effusion categories (p = 0.009). No differences were found comparing both treatment modalities concerning the position of the mandibular condyle and the articular disc. CONCLUSION: Conventional arthrocentesis was able to change the effusion variable, whereas the single needle arthrocentesis was not. Both techniques were responsible for altering the position of the mandibular head or the disc-head complex, projecting them to a more anterior position related to the increase in the final maximum interincisal distance.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate joint effusion and positioning of the articular disc through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after two different arthrocentesis techniques. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with dislocation of the articular disc without reduction (ADDwoR) were included and randomly divided into two groups: single needle arthrocentesis with distention of the upper compartment of the TMJ (A1) and conventional arthrocentesis with 2 needles (A2). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed between the different effusion categories (p = 0.009). No differences were found comparing both treatment modalities concerning the position of the mandibular condyle and the articular disc. CONCLUSION: Conventional arthrocentesis was able to change the effusion variable, whereas the single needle arthrocentesis was not. Both techniques were responsible for altering the position of the mandibular head or the disc-head complex, projecting them to a more anterior position related to the increase in the final maximum interincisal distance.
Entities:
Keywords:
Temporomandibular joint; arthrocentesis; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)