Cruz CCDM, Matta RJ

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 5-10
PDF size: 189.44 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: arthrocentesis in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is a lavage performed in this joint, it is indicated in patients with direct trauma to the TMJ, accompanied by condylar fracture; It is important to wash for the benefits it provides in the short and long term. The objective was to compare the average mouth opening and pain of the temporomandibular joint in patients operated on for mandibular condyle fractures treated with and without postoperative arthrocentesis who attended the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Service of the Roosevelt Hospital. Material and methods: an ambispective longitudinal study was designed with a non-probabilistic sample of 24 patients who did not undergo arthrocentesis during 2019 and 18 patients who underwent it during 2021. Results: it was determined that the most common cause of facial trauma with condyle fractures mandibular injury was in a motorcycle accident (52.4%), followed by forceful blows (14.3%). The most frequent fracture of the mandibular condyle, according to the AO CMF classification, was the condylar base fracture (54.8%), in addition, it was observed that the group that underwent arthrocentesis presented condylar neck fractures more frequently than the group that did not undergo arthrocentesis. to arthrocentesis (66.7% vs. 29.2%). Mouth opening was significantly greater in individuals who underwent surgery for mandibular condyle fractures and underwent arthrocentesis compared to those who did not, according to the parametric repeated measures analysis of variance (p = 0.007); but no differences were observed regarding perceived pain according to the non-parametric repeated measures analysis of variance (p = 0.486). Conclusions: patients with mandibular condyle fractures benefited from arthrocentesis regarding postoperative mouth opening.

REFERENCES

1. Mangi Q, Ridgway PF, Ibrahim Z, Evoy D. Dislocation of the mandible. Surg Endosc. 2004; 18 (3): 554-556. doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-4223-z.

2. González ME, Toranzo FJM. Artrocentesis temporomandibular como modalidad terapéutica para desarreglos internos Reporte de 23 casos en el Hospital Central. Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto, SLP. Rev ADM. 1999; 56 (5): 182-186.

3. Choi KY, Yang JD, Chung HY, Cho BC. Current concepts in the mandibular condyle fracture management part I: overview of condylar fracture. Arch Plast Surg. 2012; 39 (4): 291-300.

4. Richardson FH, Cohen B. Fracturas faciales múltiples: Reporte de un caso. Cirugía Bucal, Medicina Bucal, Patología Bucal. 1953; 6 (12): 1373-1385.

5. Chaurand-Lara J, Dávila-Torres J, Pacheco-Ruíz L. Técnica Alkan para artrocentesis de la articulación temporomandibular: estudio clínico con seguimiento a seis meses. Evid Med Invest Salud. 2014; 7 (3): 114-118.

6. Ohura N, Ichioka S, Sudo T, Nakagawa M, Kumaido K, Nakatsuka T. Dislocation of the bilateral mandibular condyle into the middle cranial fossa: review of the literature and clinical experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 64 (7): 1165-1172. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2006.03.043.

7. Morales Trejo B. Evaluación y conceptos de artrocentesis Revista de la Asociación Dental Mexicana Evaluación y conceptos de artrocentesis. Rev ADM. 2003; 60 (1): 25-28.

8. Polat ME, Yanik S, Odabasi O. Retrospective evaluation of the duration of arthrocentesis in the treatment of temporomandibular joint diseases. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 121 (3): 201-205.

9. Loukota RA, Eckelt U, De Bont L, Rasse M. Subclassification of fractures of the condylar process of the mandible. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 43 (1): 72-73.

10. Whyte A, Boeddinghaus R, Bartley A, Vijeyaendra R. Imaging of the temporomandibular joint. Clin Radiol. 2021; 76 (1): 76.e21-76.e35. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.06.020.