Literature DB >> 33549540

An International Survey on Temporomandibular Joint Surgeon's Implementation and Management of Discectomy in Treating Temporomandibular Joint Internal Derangement.

Douglas F Werkman1, Louis G Mercuri2, Jonathan P Troost3, Sharon Aronovich4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To survey temporomandibular joint (TMJ) surgeons to determine current practice trends and perceptions regarding the role of discectomy for the treatment of TMJ internal derangements.
METHODS: An anonymous 5-part web-based survey was sent to TMJ surgeons. The survey was created and distributed, and the data were collected with the University of Michigan Qualtrics platform. Responses were compared based on operative volume, tendency to replace the disc, and likelihood of requiring temporomandibular joint replacement (TJR) after discectomy. Spearman correlations were used to test statistically significant differences. Domain-level analyses were also performed by summarizing items into 3 domain scores. Analyses were performed in SAS V9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
RESULTS: Fifty-nine surgeons (33.9%) completed the survey. Discectomy was not considered to be a useful procedure by 85% of respondents, and 74% would not consider discectomy as a first surgical option. Most would consider discectomy (64%) before alloplastic total joint replacement. Discectomy was preferred over discopexy for the management of anterior disc displacement with reduction by high volume surgeons (89%), but most (72%) did not feel that discectomy was beneficial over arthroscopy in the treatment of anterior disc displacement without reduction and concomitant degenerative bony changes. In managing symptomatic disc perforation, 66% agreed that discectomy is the procedure of choice and 49% felt that interpositional tissue is indicated in most cases after discectomy. Respondents who reported fewer re-operations requiring alloplastic TJR after discectomy had, on average, more positive perceptions of discectomy on the benefits domain (P = .03), better than alternatives domain (P = .03), and fewer concerns on the perceived adverse effects domain (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: TMJ surgeons do not employ TMJ discectomy in most cases of TMJ internal derangement. However, discectomy is considered useful in cases of disc perforation or for persistent symptomatic disc displacement without reduction, in an attempt to avoid alloplastic TJR. Common adverse effects included joint noises and osteoarthrosis, and the use of interpositional disc replacement tissue did not alter the incidence of adverse effects or complications reported.
Copyright © 2021 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33549540      PMCID: PMC8254738          DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2021.01.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   2.136


  44 in total

Review 1.  Discectomy for the treatment of internal derangements of the temporomandibular joint.

Authors:  S J McKenna
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  Arthroscopic lysis and lavage versus operative arthroscopy in the outcome of temporomandibular joint internal derangement: a comparative study based on Wilkes stages.

Authors:  Raúl González-García; Francisco J Rodríguez-Campo
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.895

3.  Fibromyalgia criteria and severity scales for clinical and epidemiological studies: a modification of the ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia.

Authors:  Frederick Wolfe; Daniel J Clauw; Mary-Ann Fitzcharles; Don L Goldenberg; Winfried Häuser; Robert S Katz; Philip Mease; Anthony S Russell; I Jon Russell; John B Winfield
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 4.666

Review 4.  Intra-articular disc displacement. Part I: Its questionable role in temporomandibular joint pathology.

Authors:  M F Dolwick
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 1.895

5.  Twenty-year follow-up study on a patient-fitted temporomandibular joint prosthesis: the Techmedica/TMJ Concepts device.

Authors:  Larry M Wolford; Louis G Mercuri; Emet D Schneiderman; Reza Movahed; Will Allen
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 1.895

6.  A 30-year follow-up study of temporomandibular joint meniscectomies: a report on five patients.

Authors:  M Tolvanen; V J Oikarinen; J Wolf
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 1.651

Review 7.  Current Methods of Bruxism Diagnosis: A Short Communication.

Authors:  Lucas B Pigozzi; Daniela D S Rehm; Simone C Fagondes; Eduardo P Pellizzer; Márcio L Grossi
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 1.681

8.  Temporomandibular joint disc perforation: a retrospective study.

Authors:  V Machon; J Levorova; D Hirjak; M Drahos; R Foltan
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 2.789

9.  Effects of enzymatic degradation after loading in temporomandibular joint.

Authors:  Y Asakawa-Tanne; S Su; R Kunimatsu; N Hirose; T Mitsuyoshi; Y Okamoto; E Tanaka; K Tanne; K Tanimoto
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 6.116

10.  Association between rhythmic masticatory muscle activity during sleep and masticatory myofascial pain: a polysomnographic study.

Authors:  Leylha Maria Nunes Rossetti; Carlos Dos Reis Pereira de Araujo; Paulo Henrique Orlato Rossetti; Paulo César Rodrigues Conti
Journal:  J Orofac Pain       Date:  2008
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.